Alexander Terekhov <terek...@web.de> writes: > "THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE > (JOINT OWNERSHIP) > > On information and belief, Defendant alleges that Plaintiffs’ claims are > barred because other third parties jointly created the alleged copyright > at issue and those third parties are joint copyright owners of the > alleged copyright at issue in this action.
That could be a defense if both a) all copyrighted portions were of joint copyright ownership b) defendants could show having permission from other joint copyright owners > FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE > (INDISPENSABLE PARTIES) > > On information and belief, Defendant alleges that Plaintiffs’ claims are > barred because there are indispensable parties that have not been joined > in this lawsuit, including the other authors and/or owners of the > alleged copyright at issue." Again, that requires that all copyrighted portions are of joint copyright ownership. As I said: we'll get our resident cranks to post all court filings of the defendants under "huzzah! yes!", all filings of plaintiffs under "LOL!", celebrate coming the defendants under compliance and a filed settlement as a defeat of the plaintiffs, and a prospective court ruling (if the defendants don't get a clue in time for the verdict) as absurd, the product of drunk judges and in conflict with the Supreme Court or whoever else. It's not like we have not seen this spectacle before. And time and again. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss