Re: SFLC's GPL court enforcement -- track record

[rjack]

Linonut wrote:
> * rjack peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
> > Hyman Rosen wrote:
> >
> > > The proof will be, once the case is over, whether the defendants properly
> > >  make available the sources of the GPLed software that they are
> > > distributing. That most likely will be the case, because quoting from the
> > > complaint:
> > Each time the SFLC has filed a suit, GPL'd source code has appeared. This 
> > correlation proves your hypothesis Hymen.
> >
> > Every day an SFLC suit was filed, little children died in the Sudan. This 
> > correlation proves the SFLC is killing little children.


> Well, at least we know that rjack doesn't know jack about causation.

Sure I do.

Every time (with 100% correlation) when the S.F.L.C. files a plaintiff's GPL
case in the S.D.N.Y., this action causes the plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss
his pointless lawsuit without the court ever reviewing the legal status of the
GPL or any of plaintiff's copyright claims.

This is not just conjectural since the court docket provides independent
evidence for confirmation (contrast with self-serving claims).

In the last three years, Moglen and Ravicher together have received over
$1,000,000 in compensation from public charitable contributions as S.F.L.C.
officers.

I know enough about causation to conclude that this will cause pockets to grow
fat. I also know that a negative finding by the court concerning the
enforceability of the GPL would cause this revenue stream to suddenly cease.

Sincerely,
Rjack

-- The hardest part of fleecing a sucker is convincing him to show his gratitude
for getting screwed --