gnu-misc-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar


From: amicus_curious
Subject: Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 09:41:17 -0500


"Thufir Hawat" <address@hidden> wrote in message news:address@hidden
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 09:05:35 -0500, amicus_curious wrote:

"Thufir Hawat" <address@hidden> wrote in message
news:address@hidden
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 15:26:56 -0500, amicus_curious wrote:


Does the binary file which is being distributed reside on the verizon
server?  If so, then Verizon would be required to make the source
available upon request from a customer.  If the binary isn't on a
Verizon server then Verizon has no obligations is the argument.

The fact that there's a link on verizon.com which causes this binary to
download doesn't prove that the binary file is on a Verizon server.

Well, the link resolves to downloads.verizon.net and that is most
certainly a Verizon site.  Verizon does not need to make any source
available at least in regard to the BusyBox library, and indeed does not
do so, since the case filed by the SFLC complaining of that practice was
dismissed with predjudice.

Try the link yourself.



None of the above demonstrate that the file(s) are stored on Verizon
servers, the files could be hosted on Actiontek servers.

With a URL of download.Verizon.net? Perhaps their servers could be linked behind the scenes, but that would be rather unusual at best. Why would they do that in lieu of just storing a copy of the download file? That would be a lot simpler and cheaper and doubtless the way that they are doing it. They are not just hosting Actiontec binaries, they have many other things at the same location. You guys are jusrt running around Robin Hood's barn in an attempt to show a meaningless and contrived situation. Verizon, via its website, is actively promoting the distribution of Actiontec binary programs created using GPL'd source. That is a fact and that is all that is needed to show that they are doing so without regard to the rest of the GPL terms and conditions. They don't have to observe them, they won their case by doing nothing.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]