Re: GPL and other licences

[David Kastrup]

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
> [...]
>> Wallace gets a last chance, but the court has not even found enough
>> merit in Wallace's ramblings to even start proper proceedings.
>
> "By making certain software programs available to users at no charge, 
>  the GPL may be discouraging developers from creating new and better 
>  programs because they will not receive compensation for their work, 
>  thereby reducing the number of quality programs available to users. 
>  This may be considered anticompetitive effect, and it certainly can 
>  be inferred from what Mr. Wallace alleges in his Third Amended 
>  Complaint. Therefore, this court finds that the Third Amended 
>  Complaint states a claim for violation of Section 1 of the Sherman 
>  Act, under the rule of reason doctrine."

Well, the court is trying to find out a way to interpret Wallace's
ramblings within the context of law, since he is unable to do so
himself.  So they try to construe what he might be talking about
legally, and then dismiss this claim without prejudice.

Not really an impressive achievement.

>> > We'll see much more FSF's blood this time, I think.
>> 
>> Well, we certainly can't see any less.
>
> See above.

I can't see the FSF bleeding just because the court tries to pound
some coherence into Wallace's claims before dismissing them.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum