Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/12/2010 10:37 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
There is nothing to "get". If the court finds that it cannot act because defendants have infringed upon a non-registered version, the plaintiffs can simply register that version and refile the claim. We know this from the SimplexGrinnell court decision.
17 USC Sec. 506. Criminal offenses... (e) False Representation. — Any person who knowingly makes a false representation of a material fact in the application for copyright registration provided for by section 409, or in any written statement filed in connection with the application, shall be fined not more than $2,500. "Perens claims that this lawsuit is being undertaken without his consent, even though the version of BusyBox disputed in the lawsuit is mostly his work - in other words, he holds the copyright. "First, I'd like to point out that I'm not represented in these lawsuits, and that the parties and the Software Freedom Law Center have never attempted to contact me with regard to them," Perens says, "As far as I am aware, and under advice of various attorneys, I still hold an interest in Busybox through both content and compilation copyrights." http://www.osnews.com/story/22618/BusyBox_Author_Bruce_Perens_on_the_GPL_Lawsuit 'Nuff said. Sincerely, RJack :) _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss