Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- FSF: iPhone restricts users, GPLv3 frees them

Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ROTFL http://www.fsf.org/iphone-gplv3 --- iPhone restricts users, GPLv3 frees them BOSTON, Massachusetts, USA-Thursday, June 28, 2007-On Friday, June 29, not everyone in the continental U.S. will be waiting

Re: My dad is a pirate.

Ingoramus21499 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message Should I tell him that your dad is a pirate or not? Would it hurt him to know that his dad is a pirate? Dumbass. You are not a true pirate in the popular sense that a 6 year old would understand. Legally, you are performing an unauthorized

Re: My dad is a pirate.

Ingoramus21499 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message Should I tell him that your dad is a pirate or not? Would it hurt him to know that his dad is a pirate? Dumbass. You are not a true pirate in the popular sense that a 6 year old would understand. Legally, you are performing an unauthorized

Re: News Verizon calls SFLC bluff

Linonut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Then why did they bother? And, if SFLC was at such a disadvantage, why wouldn't big ol' Verizon just go ahead and let little ol' SFLC take its beating in court? They couldn't object to a voluntary dismissal. That is an

Re: News Verizon calls SFLC bluff

rjack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] amicus_curious wrote: Linonut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Then why did they bother? And, if SFLC was at such a disadvantage, why wouldn't big ol' Verizon just go ahead and let little ol' SFLC

Re: Software Fictional Licensing Center (SFLC) Files Another Round of GPL Violation Lawsuits

Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] All of the previous lawsuits have resulted in out-of-court settlements requiring the defendants to distribute source code in compliance with the GPL. In every one of the cases that I have managed to find that had

Re: CAFC took JMRI case under advisement

Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Post-argument briefs: http://jmri.net/k/docket/cafc-pi-1/39.pdf (JMRI's post-argument citation of supplemental authority) http://jmri.net/k/docket/cafc-pi-1/40.pdf (Amici's response)

Re: public domain to GPL?

Jerry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] It seems, according to the author of the above quote, that it is possible to modify a public domain program and copyright the modified version as a whole. (If that is true, then I figure maybe I can GPL a modified version of a

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

Rjack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Assume I have the source code for the Linux 2.6 kernel. Suppose I want to use just a piece of it. How small a piece does it have to be before I'm no longer violating the GPL? What my question is really; At what point does the

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] amicus_curious wrote: My belief is that the GPL is totally unnecessary because what it seeks to prevent isn't a viable outcome to beging with. It seeks to prevent a software user from being unable to run, read, change

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] amicus_curious wrote: I would agree that providing source code itself is enough to enable a user to do all of that regardless of the fact that changes are so unlikely to ever occur. The GPL only adds a provision

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Rjack wrote: So why do folks *start off* with the assumption that legal gibberish like the GPL is enforceable? Because the U.S. constitution grants authors exclusive rights to their work. As the JMRI appeals court agreed,

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] amicus_curious wrote: What is still way up in the air is the matter of compensation due to the infringed party. If that becomes a trivial outcome, there may as well be no protection at all. In order to show value

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] amicus_curious wrote: Well, it seems to me that someone is being sued and the way out is to publish the source for the GPL project that they used internally. They are not being sued for code being used internally

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

Rahul Dhesi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] amicus_curious [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I find the many web sites that publish descriptive how-to projects as sample code to be much more useful than GPL stuff. These authors seem only interested in educating those who

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] amicus_curious wrote: The test would be where an infringing vendor is ordered by the court to disclose the changes made to the GPL source and not offered voluntarily. I don't believe this can happen. Someone infringing

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

Rahul Dhesi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I think you are completely confused about what you want to say. Sometimes you advocate the MIT license. Other times you seem to advocate no license at all, i.e., public domain works. And yet, the web sites you mention do

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] amicus_curious wrote: It is hard to understand just what you are getting at here. There are people who claim that distributing GPLed code without following the GPL's requirements is not copyright infringement. (Some allow

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] amicus_curious wrote: There is nothing really worth stealing. A great deal of code is licensed under the GPL. I'm sure that somewhere in there is something that would be useful to someone who is writing a non-free program

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Rjack wrote: believe me, if it was worth the effort it would be done. Since such work is by nature secret, you cannot know that it is not being done. But you are quite wrong that using automated procedures to modify code

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I believe Microsoft is quite nonplussed that their penetration into server markets has been blunted by free OS alternatives. That seems to be a frail reed indeed. Microsoft has gone from zero server market share (at the

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] amicus_curious wrote: Can you conceive of any instance of that? I dunno. Maybe some code generation stuff from the inside of GCC to implement some JIT compilation? Maybe some of the GIMP's image manipulation code? Maybe

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] amicus_curious wrote: That seems to be a frail reed indeed. Whatever. Let's say that GPLed code is a completely useless pile of drivel. Now can we get those silly companies to stop distributing it in violation of its

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] amicus_curious wrote: Has anyone ever tried to do that? I cannot find any such case. Well, they're either obeying the license and then the whole project is under the GPL, or they're stealing and therefore keeping

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] amicus_curious [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I believe Microsoft is quite nonplussed that their penetration into server markets has been blunted by free

Re: JMRI case -- Implementation of the Federal Circuit's Opinion

Rahul Dhesi c.c.ei...@xrexxjmrix.usenet.us.com wrote in message news:gk6t8h$db...@blue.rahul.net... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: I think that the issue of consideration is paramount. The copyright laws exist to protect the author's ability to benefit from the author's artistic

Re: JMRI case -- Implementation of the Federal Circuit's Opinion

Rahul Dhesi c.c.ei...@xrexxjmrix.usenet.us.com wrote in message news:gk7q1h$q0...@blue.rahul.net... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: Why would anyone really care unless there were some benefit to be obtained by the author due to the right to control the distribution? The copyright act

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Rjack u...@example.net wrote in message news:bumdnuh8ov-23ebunz2dnuvz_uydn...@giganews.com... With the advent of the Obama administration, it is generally expected that the Justice Department and the FTC will become much more aggressive in antitrust enforcement matters. With Microsoft's OS

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Robert Heller hel...@deepsoft.com wrote in message news:1todnfxtxmhi7ebunz2dnuvz_srin...@posted.localnet... At Sat, 24 Jan 2009 11:56:25 -0500 amicus_curious a...@sti.net wrote: Rjack u...@example.net wrote in message news:bumdnuh8ov-23ebunz2dnuvz_uydn...@giganews.com... With the advent

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Rjack u...@example.net wrote in message news:g5ednyz9jpa2oubunz2dnuvz_hswn...@giganews.com... Rjack wrote: From the findings of fact in US v. Microsoft (1998) http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm Open-Source

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Rjack u...@example.net wrote in message news:s8gdnegau9ataubunz2dnuvz_gown...@giganews.com... amicus_curious wrote: Rjack u...@example.net wrote in message news:itkdnwlb3r37h-bunz2dnuvz_jedn...@giganews.com... Microsoft is not the result of many mergers and acquisitions, rather

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

The Lost Packet jmthelostpac...@googlemail.com wrote in message news:exnel.102870$626.48...@newsfe09.ams2... Rjack wrote: Rjack wrote: From the findings of fact in US v. Microsoft (1998) http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Ian Hilliard nos...@hilliardtech.com wrote in message news:1232852472.743...@angel.amnet.net.au... amicus_curious wrote: Rjack u...@example.net wrote in message news:bumdnuh8ov-23ebunz2dnuvz_uydn...@giganews.com... With the advent of the Obama administration, it is generally expected

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

AES sieg...@stanford.edu wrote in message news:siegman-5bd46c.18355124012...@news.stanford.edu... In article 497b817e$0$1925$ec3e2...@news.usenetmonster.com, amicus_curious a...@sti.net wrote: There are several things wrong with your notion, I think. The first being that Microsoft

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:85k58jznbn@lola.goethe.zz... Robert Heller hel...@deepsoft.com writes: At Sat, 24 Jan 2009 11:56:25 -0500 amicus_curious a...@sti.net wrote: Rjack u...@example.net wrote in message news:bumdnuh8ov-23ebunz2dnuvz_uydn...@giganews.com

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:rhgfl.17447$e%6.15...@newsfe04.iad... amicus_curious wrote: There is no benefit to the community of any real significance in harassing them over adding one more site to download from. All that seems to achieve is to give credibility

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Chris Ahlstrom ahlstr...@launchmodem.com wrote in message news:trhfl.2504$19.1...@bignews5.bellsouth.net... After takin' a swig o' grog, Hyman Rosen belched out this bit o' wisdom: amicus_curious wrote: There is no benefit to the community of any real significance in harassing them over

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:98gfl.1079$_a5@newsfe17.iad... amicus_curious wrote: I think that this kind of activity will go on simply because it is fun for the participants to do so. They care not for any licensing or other restrictions. Are you deliberately

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Rjack u...@example.net wrote in message news:xnydnsslns-x4elunz2dnuvz_o-wn...@giganews.com... Cancer is a real disease. The GPL is a legal delusion in Richard Stallman's marxist mind. Figuratively, of course, in the sense that it is a hidden defect with sudden and disasterous

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:c02gl.11630$8o.8...@newsfe06.iad... Rjack wrote: Verizon told them to kiss their ass and the only result was a voluntary dismissal WITH PREJUDICE. Hasn't Alexander taught you anything at all? Verizon provides a download link for firmware

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:85bptrnsam@lola.goethe.zz... The recipient of GPLed software is free to declare the GPL void and revert to default copyright rules. What is at issue today, though, is the nature of such default copyright rules. If there is no fee

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:rl3gl.28393$1w7.20...@newsfe11.iad... amicus_curious wrote: Verizon said bushwah to the GPL and got the plaintiff to agree. The Verizon URL from which the Actiontec firmware can be downloaded includes actiontec gateway. From the outside

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:3r2gl.27854$1w7.26...@newsfe11.iad... amicus_curious wrote: The district court then dismissed the injunction on the basis that the plaintiff had not shown that there was any non-monetary harm either and pointed to a Supreme Court opinion

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Peter Köhlmann peter.koehlm...@arcor.de wrote in message news:4980c39b$0$30239$9b4e6...@newsspool1.arcor-online.net... amicus_curious wrote: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:85bptrnsam@lola.goethe.zz... The recipient of GPLed software is free to declare the GPL void

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:85y6wvmaww@lola.goethe.zz... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:85bptrnsam@lola.goethe.zz... The recipient of GPLed software is free to declare the GPL void and revert to default

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:0q5gl.3416$jd...@newsfe02.iad... amicus_curious wrote: Well you doubless lack the legal education of the district court judge so the conventional wisdom is that he is more likely to be correct than you. But he was already found wrong once

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Chris Ahlstrom ahlstr...@launchmodem.com wrote in message news:qq5gl.2878$o9@bignews2.bellsouth.net... He doesn't know that his own word here are automatically copyrighted. I think that you are wrong. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:ol5gl.3415$jd4.1...@newsfe02.iad... David Kastrup wrote: Since when? If I send a personal letter to someone, I don't charge a fee for it. He still is not authorized for redistributing my letter or using its content in publications of his.

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:ib5gl.3473$jd4.1...@newsfe02.iad... Rjack wrote: The evidence of record, a voluntary dismissal WITH PREJUDICE against Verizon is beloved by GPL opponents. That simply means that the plaintiffs decided that in this instance, they did not

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Peter Köhlmann peter.koehlm...@arcor.de wrote in message news:4980eee8$0$31874$9b4e6...@newsspool3.arcor-online.net... Why don't you just distribute some modified GPLed stuff and say that you will not supply the sources. Tell the FSF that you do so. Well, now you get to the heart of the

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:85skn3klh8@lola.goethe.zz... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote It's just like when you buy a car. You are told that you may drive away with the car in return for a sum of money, and you accept

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

ZnU z...@fake.invalid wrote in message news:znu-726d9d.18135228012...@news.individual.net... In article 4980a453$0$21838$ec3e2...@news.usenetmonster.com, amicus_curious a...@sti.net wrote: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:85bptrnsam@lola.goethe.zz... The recipient

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Tim Smith reply_in_gr...@mouse-potato.com wrote in message news:reply_in_group-50fd90.15273728012...@news.supernews.com... In article 4980a453$0$21838$ec3e2...@news.usenetmonster.com, amicus_curious a...@sti.net wrote: What is at issue today, though, is the nature of such default copyright

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

ZnU z...@fake.invalid wrote in message news:znu-fd9fd3.22275528012...@news.individual.net... In article 4980da74$0$21786$ec3e2...@news.usenetmonster.com, amicus_curious a...@sti.net wrote: Well, No. It means the plaintiff cannot bring the same complaint against the defendant in response

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:s3igl.109238$zj2.6...@newsfe23.iad... amicus_curious wrote: Well, silly, that is indeed the situation. If you don't send in the money, you are sued for it. If you never intended to pay for the car, you're going to be doing your usenet

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

ZnU z...@fake.invalid wrote in message news:znu-d89e5d.21301628012...@news.individual.net... In article 4980ee5f$0$21796$ec3e2...@news.usenetmonster.com, amicus_curious a...@sti.net wrote: ZnU z...@fake.invalid wrote in message news:znu-726d9d.18135228012...@news.individual.net

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Chris Ahlstrom ahlstr...@launchmodem.com wrote in message news:lo8gl.3064$19@bignews5.bellsouth.net... After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Köhlmann belched out this bit o' wisdom: amicus_curious wrote: Chris Ahlstrom ahlstr...@launchmodem.com wrote in message news:qq5gl.2878$o9

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:dcigl.109241$zj2.68...@newsfe23.iad... amicus_curious wrote: But if there ever were anything like that, it is not so clear that Party B is harmed. If Party B has no expectation of any gain financially, then there can be no harm if he

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:4981ac14.7050...@mail.com... ZnU wrote: If we're talking about Party A redistributing Party B's unmodified GPL'd work without making the source available, this may be true. But this is trivial, since the source is available to anyone who

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Peter Köhlmann peter.koehlm...@arcor.de wrote in message news:498107b6$0$31864$9b4e6...@newsspool3.arcor-online.net... amicus_curious wrote: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:85ocxrkkfj@lola.goethe.zz... Try reading the GPL sometime. Well, is it valid? In any case

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

ZnU z...@fake.invalid wrote in message news:znu-ca4059.21152628012...@news.individual.net... This argument would be persuasive if judges were the legal equivalent of strictly-validating XML parsers, required to reject entire documents if portions of them were invalid). But this is not, in

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:h7jgl.38006$1w7.34...@newsfe11.iad... Letters are subject to copyright. http://www.prweb.com/releases/DozierInternetLaw/InternetLawyer/prweb650951.htm Under some very narrow circumstances. Here the issue was whether a DCMA subpoena could

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:t8jgl.38007$1w7.7...@newsfe11.iad... amicus_curious wrote: the judge is not yet convinced The judge was neither convinced nor not convinced. He stated that the complaint did not detail harms, and he offered the plaintiff the chance to amend

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

ZnU z...@fake.invalid wrote in message news:znu-8e1e21.12513029012...@news.individual.net... In article 4981a3de$0$21807$ec3e2...@news.usenetmonster.com, amicus_curious a...@sti.net wrote: ZnU z...@fake.invalid wrote in message news:znu-d89e5d.21301628012...@news.individual.net

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:85k58d226h@lola.goethe.zz... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:85ocxrkkfj@lola.goethe.zz... Try reading the GPL sometime. Well, is it valid? That's entirely the choice

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Alexander Terekhov terek...@web.de wrote in message news:49822cf4.4d83c...@web.de... Hyman Rosen wrote: Alexander Terekhov wrote: Jacobsen may file an amended complaint within twenty days of the date of this Order. Dated: January 5, 2009 Today is January 5+24 days, 2009. No, Hyman? I

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:85ab99zkw2@lola.goethe.zz... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:85k58d226h@lola.goethe.zz... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

Rjack u...@example.net wrote in message news:pmodndfobpfrhh7unz2dnuvz_u2dn...@giganews.com... You seem to have a gap in your education in regard to copyrights vs patents vs trade secrets. The ideas contained in a copyrighted work are not protected. So how many ways can an idea be

Re: Artifex v. Diebold: The GPL is non-commercial!

Alexander Terekhov terek...@web.de wrote in message news:4988d3fc.7462c...@web.de... You're mistaken, Hyman. 17 USC 109. That seems like the start of a cute trick. If I make a copy from a legitimate source, then it is a legitimate copy that I can give away. I cannot copy it, but I can

Re: Artifex v. Diebold: The GPL is non-commercial!

Rahul Dhesi c.c.ei...@xrexxartif.usenet.us.com wrote in message news:gmd114$et...@blue.rahul.net... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: That seems like the start of a cute trick. If I make a copy from a legitimate source, then it is a legitimate copy that I can give away. I cannot copy

Re: Artifex v. Diebold: The GPL is non-commercial!

David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:85tz79ev9a@lola.goethe.zz... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: Alexander Terekhov terek...@web.de wrote in message news:4988d3fc.7462c...@web.de... You're mistaken, Hyman. 17 USC 109. That seems like the start of a cute trick. If I

Re: Artifex v. Diebold: The GPL is non-commercial!

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:cndil.225$ti1@newsfe21.iad... Rjack wrote: Is that like Verizon Communications telling the SFLC to kiss their royal, deep-pocketed ass and subsequently receiving a NICE BIG, FAT voluntary dismissal *WITH PREDJUDICE*. It is only your

Re: Artifex v. Diebold: The GPL is non-commercial!

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:d6yil.3129$nh4...@newsfe21.iad... In the case of downloading GPLed software, it's usually the case that the user initiates the download, whereas in the Netscape case it was the software itself initiating the download. But it may be the case

Re: Artifex v. Diebold: The GPL is non-commercial!

Rjack u...@example.net wrote in message news:o72dnc9jvzlosrdunz2dnuvz_szin...@giganews.com... What are the legal differences in a) downloading directly to a DVD and/or b) downloading to the hard drive and then copying to a DVD. Please quote all relevant legislation in any jurisdiction..

Re: Artifex v. Diebold: The GPL is non-commercial!

Andrew Halliwell spi...@ponder.sky.com wrote in message news:gkt066-8q6@ponder.sky.com... Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote: ZnU wrote: I form two corporations... This works fine, as long as the copyright holders can't prove that the two companies are just a sham created to violate

Re: Artifex v. Diebold: The GPL is non-commercial!

Doug Mentohl doug_ment...@linuxmail.org wrote in message news:gmmuqd$od...@news.datemas.de... amicus_curious wrote: Your question is too complicated for a simple answer. Please quote all relevant legislation in any jurisdiction .. But in the context of this thread, the downloading

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:vtinl.10680$2h5.6...@newsfe11.iad... amicus_curious wrote: Even though Verizon is openly distributing a product that contains GPL licensed software, they do not provide the source. If it's the routers themselves, then if Verizon buys them

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:xljnl.11049$_u5.10...@newsfe20.iad... amicus_curious wrote: Of course its the routers themselves. That's what the SDLC sued them over, namely disributing the routers without providing the GPL source. The SDLC seems to have come

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Thufir Hawat hawat.thu...@gmail.com wrote in message news:6vlnl.8393$az3.5...@newsfe01.iad... On Thu, 19 Feb 2009 13:05:35 -0500, amicus_curious wrote: Verizon openly distributes the Ationtec product. That makes them a distributor and does not make Actiontec a Verizon agent. Even though

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:0emnl.11998$2o4.5...@newsfe03.iad... amicus_curious wrote: Do you suggest that is being compliant with the GPL? The person who copies and distributes the software must comply with the GPL. Someone who gets a legal copy may redistribute

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:fhmnl.17636$ci2.8...@newsfe09.iad... amicus_curious wrote: Have you bothered to read the lawsuit as filed by the SDLC against Verizon? That is certainly not what they were claiming, rather the fact that Verizon was distributing the router

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:epanl.13858$si4.6...@newsfe22.iad... amicus_curious wrote: It was a total loss. Before the suit, the source code for the firmware on the Actiontec routers was not available. After the suit, it is. That is a total victory. I see where you

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote in message news:gnmr45$1qm...@colin2.muc.de... Would you format your paragraphs properly in future, please? In gnu.misc.discuss amicus_curious a...@sti.net wrote: So they [SFLC] didn't suddenly become aware of anything at all. They just became suddenly

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:epcnl.39588$qt3.22...@newsfe10.iad... Rjack wrote: Because the lawyers at the SFLC, being GNUtians themselves, are stupid enough to file copyright complaints in the Second Circuit for plaintiffs who have no standing in federal court since

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:otenl.22788$ug1.3...@newsfe16.iad... amicus_curious wrote: No one wants to have to bother with that. No one likes to pay money for software either, and the BSA goes after companies who fail to do so without worrying about sullying the good

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:nuenl.22790$ug1.14...@newsfe16.iad... amicus_curious wrote: Note the fact that Verizon, the defendant, is not mentioned in this statement as having to do anything at all. The SDLC surrendered, pure and simple. They look like fools

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Rahul Dhesi c.c.ei...@xrexxcopyr.usenet.us.com wrote in message news:gnnqah$gv...@blue.rahul.net... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: I don't suggest that enforcement itself is the problem, it is the enforcement of meaningless requirements The CAFC has ruled that these requirements

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Rjack u...@example.net wrote in message news:tu2dnrufqjqs0qlunz2dnuvz_tfin...@giganews.com... amicus_curious wrote: Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com wrote in message news:nuenl.22790$ug1.14...@newsfe16.iad... amicus_curious wrote: Note the fact that Verizon, the defendant, is not mentioned

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:85iqn36egq@lola.goethe.zz... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: Rahul Dhesi c.c.ei...@xrexxcopyr.usenet.us.com wrote in message news:gnnqah$gv...@blue.rahul.net... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: I don't suggest that enforcement

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Doug Mentohl doug_ment...@linuxmail.org wrote in message news:gnp2os$e4...@news.datemas.de... amicus_curious wrote: What irks me is that the victims of the SDLC are the little companies that use Linux the way that it was intended to be used and do not have the resources to waste

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:851vtr64ch@lola.goethe.zz... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: but that is meaningless to me. Laws don't depend on you seeing a meaning in them. Who is talking

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:85r61r4nvu@lola.goethe.zz... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: If it fails early, it gets returned to the store or to the manufacturer for credit. If your whole computing centre gets compromised because a packet logger could

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Rahul Dhesi c.c.ei...@xrexxcopyr.usenet.us.com wrote in message news:gnpj2u$7q...@blue.rahul.net... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: Look at the SFLC website for a complete list. Typically, some company, for example Monsoon, uses stock FOSS stuff in their product, which is what the FOSS

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote in message news:gnp50j$2qe...@colin2.muc.de... The Verizon website, http://www.verizon.com/, appears to contain no mention of their victory. You'd think they'd put up something to counteract the negative publicity, surely? Or to discourage future fools from

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote in message news:gnq384$27e...@colin2.muc.de... You could make the same sort of argument about any petty peccadillo. Why bother prosecuting a fare dodger for a 2 Euro fare? Seems a bit disproportionate, doesn't it? Do they arraign and prosecute people for

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Rahul Dhesi c.c.ei...@xrexxcopyr.usenet.us.com wrote in message news:gnq41q$sr...@blue.rahul.net... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: Well that subject line was long ago. What I am saying is the the SFLC and its client BusyBox are just wasting the world's time. Perhaps they have a legal

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Thufir Hawat hawat.thu...@gmail.com wrote in message news:do0ol.50595$xk6.48...@newsfe12.iad... On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 17:39:24 -0500, amicus_curious wrote: The FOSS value proposition is that if you use it, fine, and if you modify it and distribute it you must disclose your modifications

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote in message news:gnq4bn$27e...@colin2.muc.de... In gnu.misc.discuss amicus_curious a...@sti.net wrote: Rahul Dhesi c.c.ei...@xrexxcopyr.usenet.us.com wrote in message news:gnpj2u$7q...@blue.rahul.net... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: Look at the SFLC

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:85fxi6u9li@lola.goethe.zz... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote in message news:gnq384$27e...@colin2.muc.de... You could make the same sort of argument about any petty peccadillo. Why bother prosecuting

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Rahul Dhesi c.c.ei...@xrexxcopyr.usenet.us.com wrote in message news:gnqf0f$8b...@blue.rahul.net... amicus_curious a...@sti.net writes: The companies misappropriating GPL software are thus causing a lot of time and effort to be expended. If they respected the copyrights of software authors

  1   2   3   >