luke.leighton wrote on Monday, 5 August: > it would be dangerous for the *entire* free software world not to > pursue criminal infringment against goldman sachs, because this would > give strength to anyone - including goldman sachs - when pursuing > estoppel defense strategies
I don't see your logic here. Generally speaking, latches doesn't come up in issues copyright infringement, except with regard to seeking a preliminary injunction to stop distribution. Admittedly, IANAL and TINLA. > my idea would be to contact the SFLC, see if they have time to take > this up. IIUC, SFLC doesn't do GPL enforcement anymore. At the very least, I can tell you definitively that Conservancy is the center for GPL enforcement for BusyBox, Linux, Samba, and a few other projects, and SFLC doesn't represent Conservancy anymore. Anyway, removal of copyright notices is nowhere near as horrible a GPL violation as GPLv2§3 / GPLv3§6 violations, of which there are hundreds of to be handled. We should focus on those. -- -- bkuhn
