In gnu.misc.discuss Alexander Terekhov <[email protected]> wrote: > Alan Mackenzie wrote: >> In gnu.misc.discuss Alexander Terekhov <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Alan Mackenzie wrote: >> > [...] >> >> Tell me, have there been any cases where somebody has been sued for >> >> infringement of the GPL (whichever version), and the resolution of the >> >> legal process has allowed him to continue infringing the GPL? >> > Case number 1:07-cv-11070-LTS. >> > On this page >> > http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp >> > Verizon continues to distribute GPL'd works in binary form utterly >> > ignoring the GPL. >> Does it ignore the GPL? I haven't checked. > Why don't you "check it", Alan? I was assuming you'd have already checked it, and would want to save others on the newsgroup, including me, from needless work. Have you checked it, Alex? Does the download offered on that page violate the GPL? >> > The case against Verizon >> > http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2007/dec/07/busybox/verizon.pdf >> That's just the plaintiff's complaint. > Yeah, and... ? So it wasn't particularly pertinent to the point at issue, that's all. But thanks, anyhow. >> > was dismissed WITH PREJUDICE against plaintiffs. >> Was it? Can you cite the document of dismissal? That would be more >> helpful. > http://www.terekhov.de/GPLvVerizon/DISMISSAL.pdf The notice is actually of voluntary dismissal, and there is no sign of anything "against" the plaintiffs. It looks like the point having become moot as a result of the defendant coming into compliance before the actual case. 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? > regards, > alexander. -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany). _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
