Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/12/2010 7:55 PM, RJack wrote:
Title 17 USC ยง 301
Preemption of state laws equivalent to copyright is irrelevant to the
GPL, which is a copyright license authorizing others to practice
some of the exclusive rights of the copyright holders, as per federal
copyright law.
So... I'll ask the question once more. Where is the link to
"BusyBox 0.60.3" which was registered and claimed in the SFLC
lawsuit as the infringed work?
The SFLC lawsuit does not claim that BusyBox 0.60.3 is the infringed
work, as can easily be seen by reading the complaint,
<http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2009/busybox-complaint-2009-12-14.pdf>.
The defendants are required to make available the version of the
BusyBox source code used to create the binary which they are copying
and distributing, not the source to BusyBox 0.60.3.
The SFLC lawsuit claims that BusyBox 0.60.3 is the infringed work, as
can easily be seen by reading the complaint,
<http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2009/busybox-complaint-2009-12-14.pdf>.
The plaintiffs are required to make available with specificity (i.e.
non-moving target) the registered version (v. 0.60.3) of the BusyBox
source code used to create the binary which they allege is copied and
distributed, not the source code to some other BusyBox version.
Sincerely,
RJasck :)
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss