On Fri, 07 Mar 2014 11:41:25 +0100, Kern wrote in message <[email protected]>:
> On 03/07/2014 01:32 AM, Arnt Karlsen wrote: > > On Thu, 06 Mar 2014 13:03:04 +0100, Kern wrote in message > > <[email protected]>: > Perhaps all this was obvious to you, but my main point is that from > the standpoint of an open source developer, what I am hearing on > this list about checksumming worries me that you are going in a > direction that could put more burden on developers not > just those who violate the GPL. ..having taken part in 11 years of Groklaw.net, I feel a wee bit of short term agony on our part right now, will prevent another few decades of frivolous litigation, once we have checksumming etc frivolous lawsuit swatter tools in place in the courts. ..but we must make those tools available first. > > ..pity, you could have use this in your (secret?) lawsuit on Bareos. > > Now, that is a very curious comment "secret?". I didn't know there > was anything secret about this lawsuit. It is documented on the > Bareos website ...where they mention how they were not properly served... ;o) > The lawsuit is about alleged theft of proprietary code and unfair > competition. Bareos also violated the Bacula copyright license, held > by the FSFE and after working with the FSFE corrected the most > flagrant violations. However, it is my belief that they are still > violating the copyright in two senses, one the commercial > (not putting the copyright where it should be), two violating > basic author's rights. Since I am no longer the copyright owner, > I can only act concerning part two: author's rights. My own > personal view as an open source project manager is presented at: > > http://blog.bacula.org > > Warning, it is longwinded. (this comment not made with any > negative intention). ..indeed ;o), but messing around with copyright notices is a "Big Mistake", even without that thick Austrian accent. ..the expensive part is in your allegations of "unfair competition", this will be hard to prove cheaply either way, "The SCO Group" also tried that, and failed, but your alleged facts looks better founded, and those are offtopic here, except as a litigation tactic. > Checksums would not be of any use in this case. ..read "checksums" as "tests the jurors can easily do themselves", such easy test would be useful if we had them now. > Best regards, > Kern > > > Maybe Bareos can use this in their defense and countersuit? ;o) > > http://www.baculasystems.com/blog/bacula-systems-sa-files-lawsuit-against-bareos-gmbh-co-kg > > http://www.bareos.org/en/news/items/lawsuite-between-bacula-systems-sa-and-bareos-gmbh-co-kg-copy.html -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case.
