Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

[Peter Köhlmann]

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

He knows just too well that Verizon is actually in compliance now, and for 
that reason can distribute the binaries.

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

The GPL is *very* enforcible, and all the idiocy from the likes of Rjack 
or A.Terekhov will not change that fact
-- 
Who the fuck is General Failure, and why is he reading my harddisk?