[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar
From: |
Alan Mackenzie |
Subject: |
Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar |
Date: |
Fri, 13 Feb 2009 16:19:00 +0000 (UTC) |
User-agent: |
tin/1.6.2-20030910 ("Pabbay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-RELEASE (i386)) |
'ten Tag, Peter!
In gnu.misc.discuss Peter K?hlmann <peter.koehlmann@arcor.de> wrote:
> Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> < snip >
>>>> But then, you're familiar with the details. Is there any evidence in
>>>> this case that this dismissal has allowed the defendant (Verizon) to
>>>> continue infringing the GPL?
>>> Read on what "res judicata" means...
>> Is there any evidence in this case that this dismissal has allowed the
>> defendant (Verizon) to continue infringing the GPL? Just thought you
>> might know the answer to that question. It's the main point in this
>> sub-thread. If you don't know, that's fine.
> He knows. That is the reason he bypasses actually answering the question
I only noticed today that he's posting from a .de address. I didn't
think there were people like that in Germany - I've not met any others
like him, here. I'm thoroughly disillusioned now. ;-)
> He knows just too well that Verizon is actually in compliance now, and for
> that reason can distribute the binaries.
Yes, I've kind of gathered that.
> There has never been a case where a company distributing GPLed software
> continued to do so without coming into compliance when the FSS (or for
> example H. Welte in germany) went to court.
Yes. That guy deserves an award!
> The GPL is *very* enforcible, and all the idiocy from the likes of Rjack
> or A.Terekhov will not change that fact
All the idiocy? There's not actually very much of it, just that it gets
repeated ad nauseam. ;-)
--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, (continued)
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Hyman Rosen, 2009/02/12
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Rjack, 2009/02/12
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alan Mackenzie, 2009/02/12
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/02/13
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alan Mackenzie, 2009/02/13
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/02/13
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alan Mackenzie, 2009/02/13
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/02/13
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alan Mackenzie, 2009/02/13
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Peter Köhlmann, 2009/02/13
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar,
Alan Mackenzie <=
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/02/13
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alan Mackenzie, 2009/02/13
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/02/13
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alan Mackenzie, 2009/02/13
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Hyman Rosen, 2009/02/13
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/02/13
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Hyman Rosen, 2009/02/15
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/02/13
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alan Mackenzie, 2009/02/13
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Hyman Rosen, 2009/02/13