Hyman Rosen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >Rahul Dhesi wrote: >> Your essential argument is that although they are hiding the actual >> settlement, they are not hiding anything within it.
>No. They are hiding the exact monetary amounts involved, >for example, and there may be other things as well. We >know only what both sides have agreed should be made >public. One of those things is that the defendants have >agreed to comply with the GPL, which is the goal of the >SFLC. So we agree that they have something to hide. And you seem to be contradicting yourself, sometimes arguing they have nothing to hide, sometimes conceding that they do. There may be good reasons to hide the monetary amount. If it's large (e.g., SFLC gets $10 million), it makes the defendant look bad (akin to admitting wrong-doing) and may also make the SFLC look bad (greedy). If it's small (e.g., SFLC gets $50), if makes the SFLC look bad (it means the defendant essentially got away with wrong-doing and lost nothing when caught. But they could have redacted the amount and published the rest. There must be more -- enough that a few redactions would not suffice. -- Rahul http://rahul.rahul.net/ _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
