Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License. Now, the definition of a condition is: ARTICLE 224 Condition Defined: A condition is an event, not certain to occur, which must occur, unless its non-occurrence is excused, before performance under a contract becomes due.; ALR, Restatement (Second) of Contracts. The whole World awaits with 'bated breath for GPL supporters to either put up or shut up by identifying the two critical elements: 1) the event; and 2) the performance. Section 2 of GPLv2 begins http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html 2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions: A straightforward application of the Article 224 definition would then consider the uncertain event to be modifying, copying and/or distributing the covered work, and the performance would be the cause to be licensed and the other requirements of the GPL. The extent to which it is meaningful to apply contract law to the GPL, which is a license and not a contract, and how that interacts with copyright infringement is, of course, the subject of our endless argument. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License. Now, the definition of a condition is: ARTICLE 224 Condition Defined: A condition is an event, not certain to occur, which must occur, unless its non-occurrence is excused, before performance under a contract becomes due.; ALR, Restatement (Second) of Contracts. The whole World awaits with 'bated breath for GPL supporters to either put up or shut up by identifying the two critical elements: 1) the event; and 2) the performance. Section 2 of GPLv2 begins http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html 2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions: A straightforward application of the Article 224 definition would then consider the uncertain event to be modifying, copying and/or distributing the covered work, and the performance would be the cause to be licensed and the other requirements of the GPL. LOL. The performance above means that a promise becomes binding on the side of the LICENSOR/OFFEROR, not licensee/offeree you idiot. Licensee's act of copying is an act manifesting contract acceptance and it has nothing to do with conditions precedent. http://law.scu.edu/FacWebPage/Neustadter/e-books/abridged/main/commentary/Promises%20and%20condtions.html A portrait artist promises to paint a portrait of Bill Gates to be hung in the lobby of the Microsoft office tower in which Bill works. In exchange, Bill promises to pay $5,000 for the portrait if satisfied with the rendering. Bill's promise to pay is subject to a condition precedent of satisfaction. We explore conditions of satisfaction in Kennedy Associates, Inc. v. Fischer, in which a prospective financier balked on lending money to a prospective borrower after inspecting the real property that was to serve as collateral for repayment of the loan. Got it now, silly Hyman? regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/14/2010 10:02 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://law.scu.edu/FacWebPage/Neustadter/e-books/abridged/main/commentary/Promises%20and%20condtions.html A portrait artist promises to paint a portrait of Bill Gates to be hung in the lobby of the Microsoft office tower in which Bill works. In exchange, Bill promises to pay $5,000 for the portrait if satisfied with the rendering. Bill's promise to pay is subject to a condition precedent of satisfaction. A developer promises to copy and distribute a GPL-covered work in compliance with the GPL. In exchange, the copyright holder promises not to sue for copyright infringement. The copyright holder's promise not to sue is subject to the condition precedent of compliance with the GPL. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
David Kastrup wrote: [... dodging the question ...] Stop moving the goalposts, silly dak. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License. Now, the definition of a condition is: ARTICLE 224 Condition Defined: A condition is an event, not certain to occur, which must occur, unless its non-occurrence is excused, before performance under a contract becomes due.; ALR, Restatement (Second) of Contracts. The whole World awaits with 'bated breath for GPL supporters to either put up or shut up by identifying the two critical elements: 1) the event; and 2) the performance. Section 2 of GPLv2 begins http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html 2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions: A straightforward application of the Article 224 definition would then consider the uncertain event to be modifying, copying and/or distributing the covered work, and the performance would be the cause to be licensed and the other requirements of the GPL. The extent to which it is meaningful to apply contract law to the GPL, which is a license and not a contract, and how that interacts with copyright infringement is, of course, the subject of our endless argument. The contract performance is based on the promise that You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work In other words the the performance of the promise (consideration) is the copyright permissions (grant) to modify, copy and distribute the offered source code. In the definition of a condition (see above) the event must must occur BEFORE the performance of the permissions becomes effective. It is a logical impossibility for the event to depend upon the contract performance and that is why the conditions in a copyright license are called conditions precedent. The event must PRECEDE the performance (permissions) which are granted. The event in section 2 which must occur is provided that... You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License. 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 is known as an impossible condition and is void. The consequences of a void condition are construed against the drafter, hence promissory estoppel. Sincerely, RJack :) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/14/2010 10:02 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://law.scu.edu/FacWebPage/Neustadter/e-books/abridged/main/commentary/Promises%20and%20condtions.html A portrait artist promises to paint a portrait of Bill Gates to be hung in the lobby of the Microsoft office tower in which Bill works. In exchange, Bill promises to pay $5,000 for the portrait if satisfied with the rendering. Bill's promise to pay is subject to a condition precedent of satisfaction. A developer promises to copy and distribute a GPL-covered work in compliance with the GPL. In exchange, the copyright holder promises not to sue for copyright infringement. The copyright holder's promise not to sue is subject to the condition precedent of compliance with the GPL. Compliance with (enforceable) obligations stated in the GPL requires copyright permission (i.e. the copyright holder's promise not to sue under copyright) as a *precondition* to compliance/licensee's performance you retard. Versa: On information and belief, Defendant alleges that Plaintiffs claims are barred because Defendants performance of any obligations with respect to the alleged license at issue in this action have been excused by lack and/or material failure of consideration on the part of Plaintiffs with respect to that license. Got it now, silly Hyman? regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/14/2010 10:31 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Compliance with (enforceable) obligations stated in the GPL requires copyright permission (i.e. the copyright holder's promise not to sue under copyright) as a *precondition* to compliance/licensee's performance. No, that is false. The conditions of the GPL do not require the precondition on unrestricted copy permission. They are conditions which are applied as the copy is made and distributed. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 is known as an impossible condition and is void. The consequences of a void condition are construed against the drafter, hence promissory estoppel. You are wrong, because you are misreading the license. GPLv2 says http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html 2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions: a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change. b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License. Permission to create a derivative work requires compliance only with section 2(a). It is the copying and distribution of the derivative work that must also meet the conditions of 2(b). ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] conditions which are applied as the copy is made and distributed. Could you please elaborate on this GNUjurisprudence concept, retard Hyman? regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 is known as an impossible condition and is void. The consequences of a void condition are construed against the drafter, hence promissory estoppel. You are wrong, because you are misreading the license. GPLv2 says http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html 2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions: a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change. b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License. b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License. c) If the modified program normally reads commands interactively when run, you must cause it, when started running for such interactive use in the most ordinary way, to print or display an announcement including an appropriate copyright notice and a notice that there is no warranty (or else, saying that you provide a warranty) and that users may redistribute the program under these conditions, and telling the user how to view a copy of this License. (Exception: if the Program itself is interactive but does not normally print such an announcement, your work based on the Program is not required to print an announcement.) Permission to create a derivative work requires compliance only with section 2(a). It is the copying and distribution of the derivative work that must also meet the conditions of 2(b). What are you smoking Hyman? regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 is known as an impossible condition and is void. The consequences of a void condition are construed against the drafter, hence promissory estoppel. You are wrong, because you are misreading the license. GPLv2 says http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html 2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions: a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change. b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License. Permission to create a derivative work requires compliance only with section 2(a). It is the copying and distribution of the derivative work that must also meet the conditions of 2(b). Huh? . . . provided that you also meet *all* of these conditions:. . . How do you cause the event . . . the modified files to carry prominent notices when it is a precondition to permission to You may modify your copies. . .? The event requires performance before the conditioned performance is due. What do you suggest? Moooving the goalposts into the the past with a time travel machine? ROFL. Sincerely, RJack :) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/14/2010 10:31 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Compliance with (enforceable) obligations stated in the GPL requires copyright permission (i.e. the copyright holder's promise not to sue under copyright) as a *precondition* to compliance/licensee's performance. No, that is false. The conditions of the GPL do not require the precondition on unrestricted copy permission. They are conditions which are applied as the copy is made and distributed. No Hyman, that is *true* in the Second Circuit: Further, it is important that James turned over the C version for use before any royalties were paid, and that the first version of PDSI-004-1 was published with the proper notice of authorship, because contract obligations that are to be performed after partial performance by the other party are not treated as conditions. 22 N.Y. Jur. 2d Contracts § 265 (1996); see also Jacob Maxwell, Inc. , 110 F.3d at 754 (holding that payment of royalties and crediting of author were covenants because [the composer] expressly granted [the licensee] permission to play the song before payment was tendered or recognition received); I.A.E., Inc. , 74 F.3d at 778 (holding that full payment was not a condition precedent when the licensee received the copyrighted drawings after tendering only half the required payment).; Graham v. James, 144 F.3d 229 (C.A.2 (N.Y.), 1998). Hyman, the obession with your non-precedental CAFC ruling is going to cause 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
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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. Language cleanup was one of the reasons for GPLv3, of course. How do you cause the event . . . the modified files to carry prominent notices when it is a precondition to permission to You may modify your copies. . .? The condition is a limitation on what the altered files may look like. It is nonsensical to assume that copyright infringement occurs due to the intermediate steps involved in producing a permitted alteration. For example, no publisher's contract with an author explicitly authorizes the publisher to create intermediate copies for the process of producing a book, such as printing plates or digital copies. But an author suing for infringement on those grounds would get laughed out of court, not least for your favorite promissory estoppel. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 distribute in compliance with the GPL. There is no partial performance. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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. Language cleanup was one of the reasons for GPLv3, of course. How do you cause the event . . . the modified files to carry prominent notices when it is a precondition to permission to You may modify your copies. . .? The condition is a limitation on what the altered files may look like. It is nonsensical to assume that copyright infringement occurs due to the intermediate steps involved in producing a permitted alteration. Do you have the slightest idea what you are blathering about? I don't. For example, no publisher's contract with an author explicitly authorizes the publisher to create intermediate copies for the process of producing a book, such as printing plates or digital copies. But an author suing for infringement on those grounds would get laughed out of court, not least for your favorite promissory estoppel. Sincerely, RJack :) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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. That's correct. The performance by the licensee is to copy and distribute in The act of copying is a manifestation of contract acceptance you idiot. As for distribute, see 17 USC 109 and http://www.terekhov.de/Samsung-Answer.pdf As a separate and distinct Twelfth Affirmative Defense and each claim for relief alleged therein, Defendant alleges that Plaintiffs claim for copyright infringement is barred under at least the provisions of 17 U.S.C. § 109(a), as Defendant was licensed and any copies alleged to be infringing were, therefore, lawfully made. regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/14/2010 3:16 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: 17 USC 109 The files distributed by the defendants are not first-sale copies, so 17 USC 109 is irrelevant. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/14/2010 3:16 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: 17 USC 109 The files distributed by the defendants are not first-sale copies, so 17 USC 109 is irrelevant. Sez who? regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/14/2010 3:20 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Hyman Rosen wrote: The files distributed by the defendants are not first-sale copies, so 17 USC 109 is irrelevant. Sez who? The defendants offer files for download from their websites. Their web servers create fresh copies with each download, assuming conventional operation. Those may be created and distributed only in compliance with the GPL. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 distribute in compliance with the GPL. There is no partial performance. Ah! I know what! Let's just deny everything and mooove the goalposts! Sincerely, RJack :) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 of the GPL while still copying and distributing GPL-covered works who claim to have any difficulty understanding it. No one is forced to accept the GPL, but there is no other way to get to copy and distribute GPL-covered works. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
RJack u...@example.net writes: 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 distribute in compliance with the GPL. There is no partial performance. Ah! I know what! Let's just deny everything and mooove the goalposts! But that's what you do all the time, anyway. -- David Kastrup ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 of the GPL while still copying and distributing GPL-covered works who claim to have any difficulty understanding it. No one is forced to accept the GPL, but there is no other way to get to copy and distribute GPL-covered works. 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. Maybe in the Marxist land of GNU, that fraud is morally and legally acceptable but under U.S. law it is an illegal misuse of copyright that is strictly against public policy. Sincerely, RJack :) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 being permitted to copy and distribute covered works. The only way to be misled is willfully. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 being permitted to copy and distribute covered works. The only way to be misled is willfully. OK. You win. The GPL license *willfully* misleads people. Happy now? Sincerely, RJack :) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 you just don't get to pick and choose like you wish. Sincerely, RJack :) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Alexander Terekhov terek...@web.de writes: 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. See http://www.terekhov.de/Samsung-Answer.pdf for TWENTY (20) reasons why it is perfectly fine to 'steal' GPL'd work. Let the judge agree on any of those reasons, and then come back here. Or let Samsung drop out of the case without causing the GPLed sources to be available to the respective customers in a reasonable time frame. If neither of those two events happen (and in no court case so far anything like that happened, so that should give a good clue about how probable they are), your perfectly fine thesis seems quite shaky. So far you are batting zero in that respect, for all the years of your trumpeting around here. That's not all that close to perfect unless you are living in a fantasy world. -- David Kastrup ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
David Kastrup wrote: [...] you are living in a fantasy world. *You* are living in a fantasy world (where copyright licenses are not contracts and etc. GNU moronity), silly dak. The main difference to the variants of communism typical Americans associate with the devil, however, is that participation in the GNU communism is entirely voluntary and works on a case-by-case basis for software. The difference between GPLed and lighter licensed free software is that in order to exploit a particular piece of GPLed software, you have to play by the rules under which the software was created. -- GNUtian David Kastrup regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Alexander Terekhov terek...@web.de writes: David Kastrup wrote: [...] you are living in a fantasy world. *You* are living in a fantasy world (where copyright licenses are not contracts and etc. GNU moronity), silly dak. Since you are the one batting zero in the real world, I am not all too worried with this discrepancy between our assessments. -- David Kastrup ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/14/2010 7:55 PM, RJack wrote: Sorry Sweetheart. Sometimes you just don't get to pick and choose like you wish. But fortunately, in the case of copyright 17 USC 106 guarantees that you do. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/14/2010 7:55 PM, RJack wrote: Sorry Sweetheart. Sometimes you just don't get to pick and choose like you wish. But fortunately, in the case of copyright 17 USC 106 guarantees that you do. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 (3), the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this title, or any person authorized by such owner, is entitled, without the authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the possession of that copy or phonorecord. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/109.html regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/15/2010 5:45 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: See http://www.terekhov.de/Samsung-Answer.pdf for TWENTY (20) reasons why it is perfectly fine to 'steal' GPL'd work. Several additional reasons to the ones listed by Samsung can be found here: http://www.terekhov.de/Versa-Answer.pdf Katzer ... Stop moving the goalposts, silly Hyman. http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1559052cid=31231918 -- Victory? (Score:4, Insightful) by Kjella (173770) writes: on Monday February 22, @01:44PM (#31231918) | Over 5 years, Bob Jacobsen put in thousands of hours of work on | this case. He was threatened with loss of his employment, and | with all of the money and property that he had. The $100,000 he | eventually received doesn't compensate him for this. But I'm | sure that the feeling of achievement does. If you count being tied up in court for five years, getting lots and lots of pro bono lawyer time and still not breaking even. I call this How to snuff out a potential upstart for $100,000 even though he probably wasn't competition in the first place. -- chuckles regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/15/2010 11:05 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1559052cid=31231918 Pursuing a case to conclusion takes time, effort, and money regardless of the correctness of the claims in the case. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/15/2010 11:05 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: On 4/15/2010 10:14 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 (3), the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this title, or any person authorized by such owner, is entitled, without the authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the possession of that copy or phonorecord. Unfortunately for the defendants, the binaries which they are copying and distributing are not such lawfully-made copies. Sez who? The normal process of serving files involves making copies of the files being served, and those copies may be lawfully made only by complying with the GPL. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/15/2010 11:05 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: On 4/15/2010 10:14 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 (3), the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this title, or any person authorized by such owner, is entitled, without the authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the possession of that copy or phonorecord. Unfortunately for the defendants, the binaries which they are copying and distributing are not such lawfully-made copies. Sez who? The normal process of serving files involves making copies of the files being served, and those copies may be lawfully made only by complying with the GPL. Sez who? regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/15/2010 11:23 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Hyman Rosen wrote: The normal process of serving files involves making copies of the files being served, and those copies may be lawfully made only by complying with the GPL. Sez who? 17 USC 106 http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#106 § 106. Exclusive rights in copyrighted works Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following: (1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords; ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/15/2010 11:23 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Hyman Rosen wrote: The normal process of serving files involves making copies of the files being served, and those copies may be lawfully made only by complying with the GPL. Sez who? 17 USC 106 http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#106 http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
David Kastrup wrote: Alexander Terekhov terek...@web.de writes: David Kastrup wrote: [...] you are living in a fantasy world. *You* are living in a fantasy world (where copyright licenses are not contracts and etc. GNU moronity), silly dak. Since you are the one batting zero in the real world, I am not all too worried with this discrepancy between our assessments. How do you make your income, if you don't mind me asking, dak? regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/15/2010 5:45 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: See http://www.terekhov.de/Samsung-Answer.pdf for TWENTY (20) reasons why it is perfectly fine to 'steal' GPL'd work. Several additional reasons to the ones listed by Samsung can be found here: http://www.terekhov.de/Versa-Answer.pdf Katzer had long lists of reasons why he should be able to steal JMRI's code too: http://jmri.sourceforge.net/k/docket/290.pdf. Long lists of reasons don't help unless they're long lists of correct reasons. These aren't. In Bandag, Inc. v. Al Bolser's Tire Stores, Inc., 750 F.2d 903, at 909 (Fed.Cir.1984), this court said: Accordingly, we deem it appropriate here to decide non-patent matters in the light of the problems faced by the district court from which each count originated, including the law there applicable. In this manner, we desire to avoid exacerbating the problem of intercircuit conflicts in non-patent areas. A district court judge should not be expected to look over his shoulder to the law in this circuit, save as to those claims over which our subject matter jurisdiction is exclusive. The freedom of the district courts to follow the guidance of their particular circuits in all but the substantive law fields assigned exclusively to this court is recognized in the foregoing opinions and in this case.; ATARI, INC., v. JS A GROUP, INC., 747 F.2d 1422, 223 USPQ 1074 (Fed. Cir. 1984) (en 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, RJack :) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/15/2010 11:36 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp The GPL-compliant sources for this firmware are found at http://www22.verizon.com/residentialhelp/fiosinternet/networking/troubleshooting/questionsone/124346.htm ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/15/2010 11:36 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp The GPL-compliant sources for this firmware are found at Without checking/verification all you say regarding GPL-compliant sources is just hot air out of your ass. I'm insufficiently motivated to go set up a GNU/Linux system so that I can do the builds. http://www22.verizon.com/residentialhelp/fiosinternet/networking/troubleshooting/questionsone/124346.htm And how did you come across that link, silly Hyman? BTW, try the second .tgz: http://opensource.actiontec.com/mi1424wr/actiontec_opensrc_mi424wr-rev-e_fw-20-9-0.tgz chuckles regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/15/2010 12:39 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Without checking/verification all you say regarding GPL-compliant sources is just hot air out of your ass. The web page says that it's the source code used to build the firmware. I don't see what motivation Verizon would have to lie about it, while anti-GPL cranks have every reason to lie, since they are disturbed when the SFLC succeeds in their cases and cause defendants to comply with the GPL. Thus, I'm insufficiently motivated to do the builds. BTW, try the second .tgz: http://opensource.actiontec.com/mi1424wr/actiontec_opensrc_mi424wr-rev-e_fw-20-9-0.tgz Sometimes a broken link is just a broken link. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] The web page says ... Referring to www.sapnakumar.org/EnfGPL.pdf you said that http://www.sapnakumar.org/IMG_2030.JPG/IMG_2030-full;init_.JPG is 'he'. But http://www.law.uh.edu/faculty/print.asp?PID=4715 and http://www.law.duke.edu/fac/kumar/ says that 'he' is actually 'she'. Whom am I going to believe? regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Alexander Terekhov wrote: Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] The web page says ... Referring to www.sapnakumar.org/EnfGPL.pdf you said that http://www.sapnakumar.org/IMG_2030.JPG/IMG_2030-full;init_.JPG is 'he'. But http://www.law.uh.edu/faculty/print.asp?PID=4715 and http://www.law.duke.edu/fac/kumar/ says that 'he' is actually 'she'. Whom am I going to believe? 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 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
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/15/2010 1:09 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Hyman Rosen wrote: The web page says ... Referring to www.sapnakumar.org/EnfGPL.pdf you said that http://www.sapnakumar.org/IMG_2030.JPG/IMG_2030-full;init_.JPG is 'he'. The article at http://www.sapnakumar.org/EnfGPL.pdf does not refer to the gender of the author. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 magically becomes black. It's like having your own personal Fantasy Island. After each case brought by the SFLC concluded, the defendants have made the GPL-covered sources properly available under the GPL. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/15/2010 1:09 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Hyman Rosen wrote: The web page says ... Referring to www.sapnakumar.org/EnfGPL.pdf you said that http://www.sapnakumar.org/IMG_2030.JPG/IMG_2030-full;init_.JPG is 'he'. The article at http://www.sapnakumar.org/EnfGPL.pdf does not refer to the gender of the author. Then why did you refer to the author as he/him and not she/her, Hyman? regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 magically becomes black. It's like having your own personal Fantasy Island. After each case brought by the SFLC concluded, the defendants have made the GPL-covered sources properly available under the GPL. http://opensource.actiontec.com/mi1424wr/actiontec_opensrc_mi424wr-rev-e_fw-20-9-0.tgz regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/15/2010 1:56 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Then why did you refer to the author as he/him Because I blindly assumed the author was male. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/15/2010 1:57 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://opensource.actiontec.com/mi1424wr/actiontec_opensrc_mi424wr-rev-e_fw-20-9-0.tgz Sometimes a broken link is a broken link. Looking directly at http://opensource.actiontec.com/, we can see that there is a link for actiontec_opensrc_mi424wr-rev-ef_fw-20-10-7.tgz so it appears that the Verizon web page hasn't been updated yet with a link to a newer version. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/15/2010 1:57 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://opensource.actiontec.com/mi1424wr/actiontec_opensrc_mi424wr-rev-e_fw-20-9-0.tgz Sometimes a broken link is a broken link. Looking directly at http://opensource.actiontec.com. . . Note that actiontec.com is not verizon.net as in http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp Got it now, silly Hyman? regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/15/2010 1:56 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Then why did you refer to the author as he/him Because I blindly assumed the author was male. You blindly assume a lot of things. Stop it. regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/15/2010 2:44 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Note that actiontec.com is not verizon.net as in http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp http://www22.verizon.com/residentialhelp/fiosinternet/networking/troubleshooting/questionsone/124346.htm is, however, a Verizon web page. As Actiontec is the manufacturer of the routers, it is not surprising to anyone but an anti-GPL crank that the source code might be provided through a link to the manufacturer's web site. Anti-GPL cranks enjoy pretending to be holier- than-thou with respect to GPL compliance so that they can claim non-compliance. But it is the copyright holders who need to be satisfied with compliance, not the anti-GPL cranks, and they are, as witnessed by the fact that they ended their lawsuit and then the code was made properly available. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/15/2010 2:44 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Note that actiontec.com is not verizon.net as in http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp http://www22.verizon.com/residentialhelp/fiosinternet/networking/troubleshooting/questionsone/124346.htm How did you come across that link, silly Hyman? regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/15/2010 3:03 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://www22.verizon.com/residentialhelp/fiosinternet/networking/troubleshooting/questionsone/124346.htm How did you come across that link Googled for Verizon and GPL. You could have googled for busybox if you really wanted the source code. regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/15/2010 3:14 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: You could have googled for busybox if you really wanted the source code. Verizon is obligated to provide the exact version of GPL-covered sources used to build the binaries which they distribute. This obligation exists regardless of whether the sources are available elsewhere, as a condition of being permitted to copy and distribute GPL-covered works. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/15/2010 3:03 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://www22.verizon.com/residentialhelp/fiosinternet/networking/troubleshooting/questionsone/124346.htm How did you come across that link Googled for Verizon and GPL. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/15/2010 3:25 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Go tell Verizon that Verizon is obligated... http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp The GPL-compliant sources are provided by Verizon at http://www22.verizon.com/residentialhelp/fiosinternet/networking/troubleshooting/questionsone/124346.htm ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/15/2010 3:14 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: You could have googled for busybox if you really wanted the source code. Verizon is obligated to provide the exact version of GPL-covered sources used to build the binaries which they distribute. This obligation exists regardless of whether the sources are available elsewhere, as a condition of being permitted to copy and distribute GPL-covered works. You are hallucinating, Hyman. Go tell Verizon that Verizon is obligated... http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp Piss off, Hyman. regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/15/2010 3:25 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Go tell Verizon that Verizon is obligated... http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp The GPL-compliant sources are provided by Verizon at http://www22.verizon.com/residentialhelp/fiosinternet/networking/troubleshooting/questionsone/124346.htm The (incomplete) sources are provided by/from actiontec.com, not verizon.net you idiot. http://opensource.actiontec.com/mi1424wr/actiontec_opensrc_mi424wr-rev-acd_fw-56-0-10-11-6.tgz http://opensource.actiontec.com/mi1424wr/actiontec_opensrc_mi424wr-rev-e_fw-20-9-0.tgz http://opensource.actiontec.com/mi1424wr/actiontec_opensrc_ri408_fw-56-0-10-7.tar.gz (the second link is broken) regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/15/2010 3:42 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: The (incomplete) sources are provided by/from actiontec.com, not verizon.net Links to the downloadable sources are on a Verizon web page, http://www22.verizon.com/residentialhelp/fiosinternet/networking/troubleshooting/questionsone/124346.htm ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/15/2010 3:42 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: The (incomplete) sources are provided by/from actiontec.com, not verizon.net Links to the downloadable sources are on a Verizon web page, http://www22.verizon.com/residentialhelp/fiosinternet/networking/troubleshooting/questionsone/124346.htm Click on http://opensource.actiontec.com/mi1424wr/actiontec_opensrc_mi424wr-rev-e_fw-20-9-0.tgz you retard. regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 magically becomes black. It's like having your own personal Fantasy Island. After each case brought by the SFLC concluded, the defendants have made the GPL-covered sources properly available under the GPL. 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. Undisputed fact 2) No court has ever granted *any* relief requested by any BusyBox plaintiff -- ever. Undisputed fact 3) No settlement agreement concerning a BusyBox suit has been published -- ever. Who are we to believe? A Marxist GPL crackpot who claims a copyright license is not a contract or our own lyin' eyes? Sincerely, RJack :) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 distributing that version of the binary. They are obligated to distribute the source used to build the binary version of BusyBox which they are copying and distributing. After each case brought by the SFLC has ended, they have in fact done this. Undisputed fact 2) No court has ever granted *any* relief requested by any BusyBox plaintiff -- ever. This is because the defendants agree to comply with the GPL, and therefore there is no further matter for the court to decide. This is exactly how the GPL is designed to work. Compliance is trivially easy, and there is no reason for a legitimate company to fail to do so. The companies being sued by the SFLC have failed to comply with the GPL out of laziness or neglect. Undisputed fact 3) No settlement agreement concerning a BusyBox suit has been published -- ever. Settlement agreements are often kept private. However, compliance with the GPL has so far been public, and in every case where a suit brought by the SFLC ended, the defendants have come into compliance with the GPL, publicly, as evidenced by the ability to download GPL-compliant sources from their web sites. Who are we to believe? A Marxist GPL crackpot who claims a copyright license is not a contract or our own lyin' eyes? There is nothing to believe except your own eyes, because the GPL-compliant sources are made publicly available by the former defendants. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/15/2010 3:52 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Click on http://opensource.actiontec.com/mi1424wr/actiontec_opensrc_mi424wr-rev-e_fw-20-9-0.tgz That link is currently broken, presumably because it has not yet been updated to point to a newer version of the source. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] This is because the defendants agree to comply with the GPL, See COUNTERCLAIMS in http://www.terekhov.de/BestBuy-Answer.pdf regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/15/2010 4:38 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Hyman Rosen wrote: This is because the defendants agree to comply with the GPL, See COUNTERCLAIMS in http://www.terekhov.de/BestBuy-Answer.pdf That case is still in progress. To date, after each case brought by the SFLC has ended, the defendants have come into compliance with the GPL. Whether BestBuy continues the trend remains to be seen. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 distributing that version of the binary. They are obligated to distribute the source used to build the binary version of BusyBox which they are copying and distributing. After each case brought by the SFLC has ended, they have in fact done this. That is a straw man argument. We are discussing the Best Buy et al case filed in the SDNY. To institute the Best Buy et al suit, the plaintiff was required by statute to identify the allegedly infringed work's registration: § 411 · Registration and civil infringement actions (a) Except for an action brought for a violation of the rights of the author under section 106A(a), and subject to the provisions of subsection (b), no civil action for infringement of the copyright in any United States work shall be instituted until preregistration or registration of the copyright claim has been made in accordance with this title. The plaintiffs identified the registered work in the Best Buy et al complaint: 31. Mr. Andersen is, and at all relevant times has been, a copyright owner under United States copyright law in the FOSS software program known as BusyBox. See, e.g., “BusyBox, v.0.60.3.”, Copyright Reg. No. TX0006869051 (10/2/2008). To claim even a *hypothetical* compliance due to the SFLC filed lawsuit, you must demonstrate a working link to the source code to the GPL covered work that was registered and allegedly infringed. Since you can demonstrate no such link to the allegedly infringed code, you lose. Your only hope is to move the goalpost and fraudulently claim the lawsuit caused compliance with some other unregistered source code work. You lose. Sincerely, RJack :) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com writes: On 4/15/2010 3:52 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Click on http://opensource.actiontec.com/mi1424wr/actiontec_opensrc_mi424wr-rev-e_fw-20-9-0.tgz That link is currently broken, presumably because it has not yet been updated to point to a newer version of the source. It has to be pointed out that the owners of old routers have the right to the _corresponding_ source to _their_ routers as well. No idea about the distribution structure of Verizon/Actiontec. Could be that they are having compliance problems again right now. -- David Kastrup ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] Undisputed fact 2) No court has ever granted *any* relief requested by any BusyBox plaintiff -- ever. This is because the defendants agree to comply with the GPL, and therefore there is no further matter for the court to decide. This is exactly how the GPL is designed to work. Yeah, yeah. http://www.terekhov.de/BestBuy-Answer.pdf FIRST COUNTERCLAIM DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT 9. Best Buy restates and realleges each of the allegations set forth in the Counterclaim paragraphs 1-8 above. 10. By filing the instant Complaint, Plaintiffs have purported to assert a claim for copyright infringement by Best Buy of copyrights in BusyBox. 11. Best Buy has not infringed any copyrights in BusyBox. 12. Best Buy is entitled to judgment that it has not infringed any copyrights in BusyBox. regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/15/2010 6:26 PM, RJack wrote: To institute the Best Buy et al suit, the plaintiff was required by statute to identify the allegedly infringed work's registration: § 411 · Registration and civil infringement actions (a) Except for an action brought for a violation of the rights of the author under section 106A(a), and subject to the provisions of subsection (b), no civil action for infringement of the copyright in any United States work shall be instituted until preregistration or registration of the copyright claim has been made in accordance with this title. It's amazing that you can quote the statute and still misread it so badly! The statute requires that the work be registered, not that the suit identify the registration. The plaintiffs identified the registered work in the Best Buy et al complaint: 31. Mr. Andersen is, and at all relevant times has been, a copyright owner under United States copyright law in the FOSS software program known as BusyBox. See, e.g., “BusyBox, v.0.60.3.”, Copyright Reg. No. TX0006869051 (10/2/2008). All versions of BusyBox made after Erik Anderson began modifying it are derivative works of Erik Anderson's work, and he therefore owns copyright on all of them. It is possible that this court requires that every version of a work be registered separately, in which case the court will observe that the suit is about an unregistered version and may dismiss it. In that case, the plaintiffs can register the specific versions in question and refile the case. The court may also just give the plaintiffs time to register and then amend the complaint. To claim even a *hypothetical* compliance due to the SFLC filed lawsuit, you must demonstrate a working link to the source code to the GPL covered work that was registered and allegedly infringed. http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2009/busybox-complaint-2009-12-14.pdf This is simply, and even stupidly, false. The lawsuit claims infringement of BusyBox in general, not of the specific version that Erik Anderson has registered. The compliance demanded by the SFLC is with the GPL, which requires distribution of source code for the binary version the defendants copied and distributed. It is possible that the court will find that the suit is deficient in one way or another, possibly including the registration issue, but there is no point in willfully misreading what the suit demands, since it is easy to read the suit and see what it says. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/15/2010 6:26 PM, RJack wrote: To institute the Best Buy et al suit, the plaintiff was required by statute to identify the allegedly infringed work's registration: § 411 · Registration and civil infringement actions (a) Except for an action brought for a violation of the rights of the author under section 106A(a), and subject to the provisions of subsection (b), no civil action for infringement of the copyright in any United States work shall be instituted until preregistration or registration of the copyright claim has been made in accordance with this title. It's amazing that you can quote the statute and still misread it so badly! The statute requires that the work be registered, not that the suit identify the registration. A complaint which fails to plead compliance with § 411(a) is defective and subject to dismissal.; Techniques, Inc. v. Rohn, 592 F.Supp. 1195, 1197; 225 U.S.P.Q. 741 (S.D.N.Y. 1984). regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/16/2010 10:36 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: A complaint which fails to plead compliance with § 411(a) is defective and subject to dismissal.; Techniques, Inc. v. Rohn, 592 F.Supp. 1195, 1197; 225 U.S.P.Q. 741 (S.D.N.Y. 1984). If the court requires that each specific version of a work be registered, then it is possible that this suit will be found defective and be dismissed. The plaintiffs can then register the specific version involved and refile the suit. The court may also give them the option of registering and then amending the complaint. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/16/2010 10:36 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: A complaint which fails to plead compliance with § 411(a) is defective and subject to dismissal.; Techniques, Inc. v. Rohn, 592 F.Supp. 1195, 1197; 225 U.S.P.Q. 741 (S.D.N.Y. 1984). If . . . http://www.oblon.com/files/news/514.pdf under the Registration Approach, only after the Register of Copyrights actually approves the application and issues a registration, or notifies the copyright applicant that the application is rejected, is the prerequisite for a federal copyright infringement action satisfied. The courts of the Second,15 Tenth16 and Eleventh17 Circuits follow this approach. regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/16/2010 12:30 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://www.oblon.com/files/news/514.pdf under the “Registration Approach,” only after the Register of Copyrights actually approves the application and issues a registration, or notifies the copyright applicant that the application is rejected, is the prerequisite for a federal copyright infringement action satisfied. The courts of the Second,15 Tenth16 and Eleventh17 Circuits follow this approach. If the court requires that each specific version of a work be registered, then it is possible that this suit will be found defective and be dismissed. The plaintiffs can then register the specific version involved and refile the suit. The court may also give them the option of registering and then amending the complaint. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] The court may also give them the option of registering and then amending the complaint. Sez who? regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/16/2010 12:43 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Hyman Rosen wrote: The court may also give them the option of registering and then amending the complaint. Sez who? The Supreme Court: http://supreme.justia.com/us/371/178/case.html Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) declares that leave to amend shall be freely given when justice so requires, and denial of the motion without any apparent justifying reason was an abuse of discretion. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/16/2010 12:43 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Hyman Rosen wrote: The court may also give them the option of registering and then amending the complaint. Sez who? The Supreme Court: http://supreme.justia.com/us/371/178/case.html Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) declares that leave to amend shall be freely given when justice so requires, and denial of the motion without any apparent justifying And what would such hallucination-motion say to the court to justify the request to amend the complaint silly Hyman? regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/16/2010 1:13 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: And what would such hallucination-motion say to the court to justify the request to amend the complaint silly Hyman? Well, they could say we forgot. http://snltranscripts.jt.org/77/77imono.phtml Or they could say that because the infringers are distributing a binary version of BusyBox, it's difficult to determine the exact version being infringed. Or they could say that they feel it's enough to register one version, but since the court doesn't agree, they'll register all 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. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] These are lawyers. SFLC's 'lawyers' are incompetent retards. regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/16/2010 1:27 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: SFLC's 'lawyers' are incompetent retards. Since they have so far gained compliance from every defendant whose case has ended, one can only imagine how much more good for the GPL could be accomplished by competent lawyers of average intelligence. Perhaps you should count your blessings. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/16/2010 1:27 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: SFLC's 'lawyers' are incompetent retards. Since they have so far gained . . . http://opensource.actiontec.com/mi1424wr/actiontec_opensrc_mi424wr-rev-e_fw-20-9-0.tgz regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/16/2010 10:36 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: A complaint which fails to plead compliance with § 411(a) is defective and subject to dismissal.; Techniques, Inc. v. Rohn, 592 F.Supp. 1195, 1197; 225 U.S.P.Q. 741 (S.D.N.Y. 1984). If the court requires that each specific version of a work be registered, then it is possible that this suit will be found defective and be dismissed. The plaintiffs can then register the specific version involved and refile the suit. The court may also give them the option of registering and then amending the complaint And 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
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/16/2010 12:30 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://www.oblon.com/files/news/514.pdf under the “Registration Approach,” only after the Register of Copyrights actually approves the application and issues a registration, or notifies the copyright applicant that the application is rejected, is the prerequisite for a federal copyright infringement action satisfied. The courts of the Second,15 Tenth16 and Eleventh17 Circuits follow this approach. If the court requires that each specific version of a work be registered, then it is possible that this suit will be found defective and be dismissed. The plaintiffs can then register the specific version involved and refile the suit. The court may also give them the option of registering and then amending the complaint. And 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
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/16/2010 1:13 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: And what would such hallucination-motion say to the court to justify the request to amend the complaint silly Hyman? Well, they could say we forgot. http://snltranscripts.jt.org/77/77imono.phtml Or they could say that because the infringers are distributing a binary version of BusyBox, it's difficult to determine the exact version being infringed. Or they could say that they feel it's enough to register one version, but since the court doesn't agree, they'll register all 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 :) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
On 4/16/2010 2:37 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: An invalid/void/unenforceable contract (the GPL) is always an invalid/void/unenforceable contract (the GPL). The GPL is not a contract but a copyright license, and it is copyright infringement to copy and distribute GPL-covered works without complying with the GPL. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 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 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 aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye The ayes have it the motion is approved. regards, alexander. P.S. Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress. Hyman Rosen hyro...@mail.com The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/16/2010 1:27 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: SFLC's 'lawyers' are incompetent retards. Since they have so far gained compliance from every defendant whose case has ended, one can only imagine how much more good for the GPL could be accomplished by competent 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 list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
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 :) ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/16/2010 2:37 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: An invalid/void/unenforceable contract (the GPL) is always an invalid/void/unenforceable contract (the GPL). The GPL is not a contract but a copyright license, and it is copyright infringement to copy and distribute GPL-covered works without complying with the GPL. -- Whether express or implied, a license is a contract 'governed by ordinary principles of state contract law.'; McCoy v. Mitsuboshi Cutlery, Inc., 67. F.3d 917, (United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 1995) -- -- Although the United States Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 101- 1332, grants exclusive jurisdiction for infringement claims to the federal courts, those courts construe copyrights as contracts and turn to the relevant state law to interpret them.; Automation by Design, 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
