them not to do so?
How odd.
How else do you believe a badly losing plaintiff gets a winning
defendant to agree to a stipulated Rule 41 voluntary dismissal "WITH
PREDJUDICE"?
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discus
ml
http://www.itwire.com/opinion-and-analysis/open-sauce/52496-busybox-replacement-project-fuels-animated-verbal-spat
http://www.landley.net/toybox/about.html
Sincerely, RJack :)
From Rob Landley:
December 16, 2011...
"The FSF is its own worst enemy, and it has comprehensively fragmented
and FUDd
, editing, computer program.
Rights and Permissions: Software Freedom Conservancy, Inc., 137
MONTAGUE ST STE 380, BROOKLYN, NY, 11201, United States
*
Let the games begin anew with an amended complaint.
Sincerely,
RJack
ney's fees.
I would refer you to earlier claims concerning "undocumented" settlement
agreements as described by legal expert Hyman Rosen
who posts to this group.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-d
On 6/15/2011 3:54 PM, Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 6/15/2011 3:45 PM, RJack wrote:
On 6/15/2011 3:32 PM, Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 6/15/2011 3:17 PM, RJack wrote:
The GPL license was dead the day it was stillborn.
The GPL is in wide use, so you are wrong.
Yep. And pigs hold hands while flapping
On 6/15/2011 3:32 PM, Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 6/15/2011 3:17 PM, RJack wrote:
The GPL license was dead the day it was stillborn.
The GPL is in wide use, so you are wrong.
Yep. And pigs hold hands while flapping their wings
ROFL.
Reality will eventually bite you in the ass Hyman.
LMAO
amages even *if* the registration were valid. Goodbye fraudulent
Bradley and Erik.
Hope they enjoy paying *all* the defendant's attorney fees in this matter.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu
inuation
theories of successor liability must fail.
V. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, plaintiffs' motion to join WD is denied. The
Clerk of the Court is directed to close this motion (Docket No. 133)."
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discu
ions to selected recipients
of copies of his software.
"Covenants" -- not conditions dummkopf.
What rock have you been living under, silly dak?
Do you really not understand what a license is? After all this
time?
Sincerely,
RJack :)
dummkopf -- n. A stupid person; a dolt.
[German :
On 3/30/2011 10:28 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
RJack writes:
As the SFLC and Erik Andersen are learning to their dismay, a
valid Copyright Office registration of an open source project such
as a version of BusyBox requires the registration of all the
*individual* contributors' work all th
cement in a federal court is dead
long before the judge ever reads the GPL.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
2, § 4 (“You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or
distribute [BusyBox] except as expressly provided under this License.
Any attempt otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute
[BusyBox] is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under
this License.”)."; Plainiff's Reply Meme
On 3/24/2011 3:40 PM, RJack wrote:
On 3/24/2011 10:51 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
As they say:
"The GPL Is a License, not a Contract."
LMAO!
Seriously, I am very disappointed that Best Buy did not raise the
issue of copyright v. contract breach thus far.
It is instructive to l
rights to Broadcom’s
proprietary source code. Whether that code was proprietary to Broadcom,
or derivative of Linux open source code, it is completely unrelated to
BusyBox."
See the: "...nor does it have rights to Broadcom’s *proprietary source*
code..."
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
l
reproduction or distribution). See Storage Tech. Corp. v. Custom
Hardware Eng’g & Consulting, Inc., 421 F.3d 1307, 1315-16 (Fed. Cir.
2005). Contractual rights, however, can be much broader..."
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailin
On 3/22/2011 7:43 AM, RJack wrote:
On 3/22/2011 6:51 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
RJack wrote:
Best Buy Inc. has just filed a 28 page (available on PACER)
Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for
Preliminary Injunction.
Let the the fireworks begin!
SFLC's exci
On 3/22/2011 6:56 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
RJack writes:
On 3/22/2011 8:43 AM, Hiram wrote:
Hello,
I would like to know if you know of some forums or mailing lists
where I can submit a message to START a "free" application project.
I'm interested in developing a new integra
various "BSD" groups that release their projects
under the BSD style open source license. The Apache license is also
a good license to use for open source, truly free applications.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-dis
On 3/22/2011 6:51 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
RJack wrote:
Best Buy Inc. has just filed a 28 page (available on PACER)
Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for
Preliminary Injunction.
Let the the fireworks begin!
SFLC's exciting reply:
http://www.terekhov.de/
GPL. Unfortunately PJ is nothing
more than an old, washed up Spin Bag attempting to masquerade as a
journalist. Too bad she only continues to sully the reputation of real
professional journalists such as Maureen O'Gara.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
__
to file a copyright infringement suit over Busybox... Kinda'
destroys your faith in the U.S. legal system and makes you want to puke,
doesn't it?
Sincerely,
RJack :)
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-
On 3/8/2011 6:51 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
RJack wrote:
Best Buy Inc. has just filed a 28 page (available on PACER)
Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for
Preliminary Injunction.
How much is that in attoney's fees and costs?
We should remember, there
On 3/7/2011 5:49 PM, RJack wrote:
On 3/7/2011 4:08 PM, RJack wrote:
Best Buy Inc. has just filed a 28 page (available on PACER)
Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for
Preliminary Injunction.
Let the the fireworks begin!
H... Overreach ?
From the Best Bu
On 3/7/2011 4:08 PM, RJack wrote:
Best Buy Inc. has just filed a 28 page (available on PACER)
Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary
Injunction.
Let the the fireworks begin!
H... Overreach ?
From the Best Buy Inc. Memorandum in Opposition:
".
Best Buy Inc. has just filed a 28 page (available on PACER) Memorandum
of Law in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction.
Let the the fireworks begin!
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gn
ch a profoundly important paper available to the scientific
community, for comment, before it is published. We believe the best way
to advance science, is to promote debate and discussion.
http://journalofcosmology.com/Life100.html
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
g
LICENSE in this tarball for
details.
*/
_
Yeah... An original work of authorship, "Adjusted by so many folks, it's
impossible to keep track."
Best Buy's attorneys have got to be rolling on th
On 2/3/2011 10:59 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
RJack writes:
On 2/2/2011 9:47 AM, RJack wrote:
Uh... buh bye SFC and Erik Andersen:
---Filed 02/01/11--- ANSWER OF PHOEBE MICRO, INC.
Uh, that's the reply of the defendant, not a court order. Let's see
how much of it remains a
On 2/3/2011 11:24 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
RJack wrote: [...]
All this ruling really says, is that Hoops as a counter-claimant
has the status of a plaintiff (not defendant) and carries the
burden of proof and must plead facts to establish ownership of the
copies in order to defeat a
On 2/3/2011 10:54 AM, RJack wrote:
On 2/2/2011 9:47 AM, RJack wrote:
Uh... buh bye SFC and Erik Andersen:
---Filed 02/01/11--- ANSWER OF PHOEBE MICRO, INC.
... [snip]
AFFIRMATIVE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSES
Phoebe Micro, as and for affirmative and additional defenses, alleges
as follows
On 2/2/2011 9:47 AM, RJack wrote:
Uh... buh bye SFC and Erik Andersen:
---Filed 02/01/11---
ANSWER OF PHOEBE MICRO, INC.
... [snip]
AFFIRMATIVE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSES
Phoebe Micro, as and for affirmative and additional defenses, alleges as
follows:
1. The Complaint fails to state a
ant has the
status of a plaintiff (not defendant) and carries the burden of proof
and must plead facts to establish ownership of the copies in order to
defeat a Motion to Dismiss.
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/candce/4:2010cv02769/233708/47/0.pdf
On 2/2/2011 9:47 AM, RJack wrote:
Erik Andersen's application for injunction claims:
Plaintiff Erik Andersen “is the owner of the copyright of both the
derivative and pre-existing work, the registration certificate relating
to the derivative work in this circumstance will suffice to perm
On 1/4/2011 11:58 AM, RJack wrote:
SFLC filed a dismissal for VERSA TECHNOLOGY INC pursuant to Rule 41(a)1
(after an Vera's ANSWER was filed) but there is no record of Versa's
involvement or agreement to the dismissal:
*
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1),
hingsd.com/20100526/apple-worth-more-than->microsoft/
Sincerely,
RJack :)
Capitalism Triumphs!
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
the freedom provided by BSD contributions in XNU.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XNU
Look at Apple now:
And. . . Boom: Apple Worth More Than Microsoft.
http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20100526/apple-worth-more-than-microsoft/
Sincerely,
RJack :)
Capitalism Always Wins
386BSD predated that
of Linux. Linus Torvalds has said that if 386BSD had been available at
the time, he probably would not have created Linux.[see n.7]"
http://gondwanaland.com/meta/history/interview.html
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss ma
On 1/4/2011 11:58 AM, RJack wrote:
Just a scheduling reminder for the Best Buy litigation.
"...
SHRIRA A. SCHEINDLIN, U.S.D.J.:
WHEREAS, the Court issued a Scheduling Order on Feb~22,2010 (the
"Scheduling Order"); and
WHEREAS, certain parties now seek a two month eXtension o
dicted Erik Andersen's bankruptcy from this litigation. With four
of six defendants still heading to jury trial, the litigation costs will
be in the seven figures range. Ouch.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
.A. in a federal court under both federal
copyright and state contract law for more reasons than you will ever be
able to grasp.
Hyman, give up reading the law and try reading something that you can
understand.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-
ist"! Does that answer
your question? :-)
The article's author makes it perfectly clear what he means by
"communist". Read the article instead of the NNTP header GPL moron.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
copy, distribute, study, change, and improve the software (see my
above note about groupthink – philosophy of BSD is in harmony with FSF,
but not in total harmony) ...
How very true!
Sincerely,
RJack
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
created, requiring separate copyright registrations to preserve
those rights in court."
http://www.oblon.com/media/index.php?id=41#_ednref24
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO wrote:
Don't worry. The GPL license and the "Free Software" religion will
soon reside in history's trashbin that contains Urban Legends.
Bullshit. Linux and GPL is only growing. The BSDs are dying.
Its a shame because BSD is a GREAT system.
Or Shut up and Hack. Com
John Hasler wrote:
VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO writes:
BSD and PCC needs friendly people and hackers,
I don't think these trolls qualify on either count.
In the good old days we were trolled by the likes of John Dyson and
Jay Maynard: jerks, but competent hackers. Now we just get dorks.
Ahhh
om ignorance or argument from personal
incredulity, the speaker considers or asserts that something is false,
implausible, or not obvious to them personally and attempts to use this
gap in knowledge as "evidence" in favor of an alternative view of his or
her choic
RJack wrote:
All this bantering about prior cases is moot.
The SFLC has just filed a request for a pre-conference motion for
summary judgment against Westinghouse. The near future now holds all the
answers about GPL enforcement. I'm sure Judge Scheindlin will suffers no
fools in this a
erely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
s you feel better.
This is an identical situation to those who claim nonexistent GPL
settlement victories.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
asked for. That's what makes you cranks
after all.
ROFL. This, from a GNUtian moron who claims a copyright license is not a
contract.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
David Kastrup wrote:
RJack writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
RJack writes:
VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO wrote:
OK I'm so fucking tired of this.
I use OpenBSD. I use GCC. Use GNU/Linux.
BSD is free. GPL is free.
Don't worry. The GPL license and the "Free Software" religion
David Kastrup wrote:
RJack writes:
VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO wrote:
OK I'm so fucking tired of this.
I use OpenBSD. I use GCC. Use GNU/Linux.
BSD is free. GPL is free.
Don't worry. The GPL license and the "Free Software" religion will
soon reside in history's tra
list when PCC is good enough to be
on OpenBSD by default.
PCC doesn't need more hackers. PCC and the BSD's need more donations and
support from commercial vendors for drivers.
I put my money where my mouth is and proudly donate.
http://www.ope
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/20/2010 10:41 PM, RJack wrote:
And the rights holders are excluded as beneficiaries of the GPL
contract. The distribution is to other "all third parties".
What in the world are you talking about?
"23. Under the License, Mr. Andersen grants certain
se
37. Plaintiffs’ claims are barred, in whole or in part, because
Plaintiffs lack standing to assert them.
Western Digital Answer:
TENTH DEFENSE (STANDING)
46. Upon information and belief, Plaintiffs lack standing.
There certainly are a lot of GPL crank lawyers who don't think the
plaintiffs have standing.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
n' it
up as you go Hyman.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/20/2010 1:25 PM, RJack wrote:
There is *no* legal definition of what an "open" license is
Open licenses authorize actions otherwise prohibited by copyright law
provided that persons using this authorization comply with
provisions specified by the license.
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/20/2010 1:10 PM, RJack wrote:
This finding directly contradicts the Supreme Court's ruling that
to infringe, an action must violate one of the "specific exclusive
rights conferred by the copyright statute".
No, it's consistent with it - the
other than
the legal certainty that *all* copyright licenses are contracts to be
interpreted under the state law of contracts.
There is absolutely no legal difference between "open" and "proprietary"
copyright licenses. The same rules of contract construction apply
unifor
008cv07508, SDNY, (2008). Judge Shira A. Scheindlin, Diasrict
Court judge presiding over Best Buy et. al.
http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/AbuDhabi.pd
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/17/2010 4:58 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
The US Court of Appeals, the US Court of Appeals... c'mon Hyman,
face the truth: the silly opinion that you so much love is a
product of a district court level judge from New Jersey who managed
to deliberately misread and misap
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Alan Mackenzie wrote:
In gnu.misc.discuss Alexander Terekhov wrote:
David Kastrup wrote:
How do you make your income, if you don't mind me asking, dak?
I should think a lot more comfortably than you make friends.
I should think that you are jobless, right?
I'd th
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/16/2010 2:50 PM, RJack wrote:
The erroneous
It will be "erroneous" when another court says it is. Right now, it's
a valid decision of a court.
The Supreme Court has already said it's erroneous.
"In Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U. S
goal? To deflect attention from the fact that the SFLC BusyBox lawsuits
are abject failures? That a copyright license is a contract? To confuse
folks concerning the fact that the GPL is unenforceable dure to lack of
article III standing?
Sincerely,
RJack :)
_
cts Co., 463 F.3d 749, (United
States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit 2006) --
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/16/2010 2:36 PM, RJack wrote:
Virtually all open source licenses are unenforceable due to lack of
Article III standing. Open source licenses in general are only
useful for defenses against copyright infringement suits.
That's false, as we can see from this
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/16/2010 1:40 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
http://opensource.actiontec.com/mi1424wr/actiontec_opensrc_mi424wr-rev-e_fw-20-9-0.tgz
Sometimes a broken link is just a broken link.
Sometimes a GNUtian is a moron. Other times he is just a fool.
Sincerely,
RJack
tent lawyers of average intelligence.
Perhaps you should count your blessings.
One can only imagine that if it is found that a frog has wings then the
frog won't bump his ass when he jumps.
ROFL.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing l
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Hyman Rosen wrote: [...]
These are lawyers.
SFLC's 'lawyers' are incompetent retards.
I'll second that motion. All in favor say aye.
aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye
aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye a
of them. These are lawyers. As we
know from the defendants' responses you've posted, they can be
endlessly creative when coming up with supporting reasons.
And if it is found that a frog has wings then the frog won't bump his
ass when he jumps.
ROFL.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
__
he jumps.
ROFL.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
fenses against copyright infringement suits.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
d if it is found that a frog has wings then the frog won't bump his
ass when he jumps.
ROFL.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/15/2010 6:34 PM, RJack wrote:
The value of a nonexclusive copyright license like the GPL
> is called its "contractual interest".
Something like this:
<http://www.mysql.com/news-and-events/sun-to-acquire-mysql.html>
SANTA CLARA, CA January 16, 20
peterwn wrote:
On Apr 16, 2:36 am, Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/15/2010 9:43 AM, RJack wrote:
The statement ". . . (a) Plaintiffs’ copyrights are unique and
valuable property whose market value is impossible to assess, . .
." automatically establishes the fact that any alleged
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/15/2010 3:57 PM, RJack wrote:
Undisputed fact 1) There has never been a link to "BusyBox v.
0.60.3" published by any BusyBox defendant in an SFLC suit -- ever.
No one is obligated to distribute the source to BusyBox v. 0.60.3
unless they are distrib
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/15/2010 1:30 PM, RJack wrote:
Why believe your lyin' eyes when you've got Hyman Rosen and his
powerful cognitive abilities at your service? Hyman can, through
sheer mental concentration, turn fantasy into reality. Upward
points downward and white magical
ward points downward and white magically becomes black.
It's like having your own personal Fantasy Island.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/15/2010 12:00 PM, RJack wrote:
Hyman Rosen wrote:
<http://www.sapnakumar.org/EnfGPL.pdf> "The GPL is Not a
Contract"
-- "Whether express or implied, a license is a contract 'governed
by ordinary principles of state contract law.'"
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/15/2010 11:12 AM, me wrote:
Tell it to the United States Supreme Court and Justice Scalia.
Fortunately, nothing the Supreme Court has said is inconsistent with
the CAFC JMRI decision.
Also... up is down and black is white. ROFL.
Sincerely,
RJack
n, Inc. v. Raybestos Products Co., 463 F.3d 749, (United
States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit 2006) --
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/15/2010 9:43 AM, RJack wrote:
The statement ". . . (a) Plaintiffs’ copyrights are unique and
valuable property whose market value is impossible to assess, . .
." automatically establishes the fact that any alleged injury is
"conjectural and hypothet
banc)
ROFL
"[U]nless we wish anarchy to prevail within the federal judicial
system, a precedent of this Court must be followed by the lower
federal courts no matter how misguided the judges of those courts
may think it to be."; HUTTO v. DAVIS, 454 U.S. 370 (1982).
ROFL
Sincerely,
RJa
lly establishes the fact that any alleged injury is
"conjectural and hypothetical". The SFLC lawyers have pleaded their
clients right out of Court.
Note: Article III standing is distinct from legislatively conferred
statutory standing.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/14/2010 5:45 PM, RJack wrote:
The GPL license *willfully* misleads people.
Anti-GPL cranks claim to be misled by the GPL, because they want to
steal the work of other people without compensating those people in
the way they have chosen.
Sorry Sweetheart. Sometimes
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/14/2010 5:30 PM, RJack wrote:
Sounds like a Marxist dream-come-true to me. 1) Dangle promises of
copyright permissions. 2) Steal the rights of those who accept the
offer.
The GPL explicitly and in great detail spells out the obligations
which must be assumed for
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/14/2010 3:51 PM, RJack wrote:
Ah! I know what! Let's just deny everything and
mooove the goalposts!
The GPL is a perfectly straightforward copyright license, trivially
easy to comply with. It is only the people who want to avoid the
obligations o
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/14/2010 2:46 PM, RJack wrote:
contract obligations that are to be performed after partial
performance by the other party are not treated as conditions
The obligation by the licensor is not to sue for infringement. The
performance by the licensee is to copy and
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/14/2010 2:35 PM, RJack wrote:
". . . provided that you also meet *all* of these conditions:. . ."
Condition 2(b) adds the qualification "work that you distribute or
publish". The phrasing might be a bit awkward, but the meaning is
clear. Languag
use you no end of grief in the Second Circuit.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/14/2010 10:20 AM, RJack wrote:
Now, how do you cause a derivate work *that you have not yet*
received permission to create to be licensed to all third parties?
Remember the "event" must occur BEFORE permission to modify, copy
and distribute is granted. This i
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/14/2010 8:05 AM, RJack wrote:
Supporters of the GPL license as well as the SFLC claim that
section 2(b) is a "condition" to the license: "b) You must cause
any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part
contains or is derived from the
which must
occur before "performance" becomes due under the GPL contract. This
would demonstrate that section 2(b) is actually a license condition.
Hyman or DAK can't do this. Could it be that section 2(b) isn't a
license "condition" at all? You betcha'. ROFL.
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/13/2010 4:23 PM, RJack wrote:
Since you and Hyman are incapable of understanding the meaning and
operation of a "condition precedent" as used in copyright
contracts, you will forever remain confused concerning licensing
fundamentals.
It is you who are in
and Hyman are incapable of understanding the meaning and
operation of a "condition precedent" as used in copyright contracts,
you will forever remain confused concerning licensing fundamentals.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing lis
Hyman are incapable of understanding the meaning and
operation of a "condition precedent" as used in copyright contracts,
you will forever remain confused concerning licensing fundamentals.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing lis
and Hyman are incapable of understanding the meaning and
operation of a "condition precedent" as used in copyright contracts,
you will forever remain confused concerning licensing fundamentals.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing lis
are therefore infringing on the copyright of the covered
works.
Since you and Hyman are incapable of understanding the meaning and
operation of a "condition precedent" as used in copyright contracts,
you will forever remain confused concerning licens
tion of BusyBox after that time by each Defendant was and is
without Plaintiffs' permission.
Since you and DAK are incapable of understanding the meaning and
operation of a "condition precedent" as used in copyright contracts,
you will forever remain confused concerning licen
not the case with the GPL.
Since you and DAK are incapable of understanding the meaning and
operation of a "condition precedent" as used in copyright contracts,
you will forever remain confused concerning licensing fundamentals.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
_
1 - 100 of 1438 matches
Mail list logo
