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

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

Re: Tom Tom and Microsofts Linux patent lock-down ..


From: amicus_curious
Subject: Re: Tom Tom and Microsofts Linux patent lock-down ..
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 08:46:32 -0400


"Rahul Dhesi" <address@hidden> wrote in message news:address@hidden
"amicus_curious" <address@hidden> writes:

What is kind of interesting here is that the GPL purists, notably SJVN, a
Linux blogger of note, is insisting that TomTom be barred from making any
kind of patent deal with Mr. Softee....

Welcome to the workings of the adversary system of justice. Maybe this
is the first time you are being exposed to it. Here's how it works.

The copyright owner, and those cheering for the copyright owner, will
ask for the earth and the moon and an injunction prohibiting any further
copying. Sometimes the injunction is granted. You might recall the
famous mp3.com case, in which the RIAA and its members essentially wiped
out a half-billion-dollar company overnight with an injunction.

The defendant, on the other hand, and those cheering for it (typically
including you and Rjack :-) may make pious claims and act hurt like
wounded puppies (we are shocked, shocked!) and may argue that there is
no infringement at all.  Or even that there is no valid copyright at
all, like what JMRI argued.

What will really happen? We don't know yet. The only thing we can be
sure about is that there will be a lot of posturing from both sides.

Often, there is a settlement which gives something to each side.

However, so far as I know, none of the Linux kernel copyright holders
has yet sued Tom-Tom, and we don't know that there even will be such a
lawsuit. So you can wait for the game to start before you start cheering
for your side.
--
You seem to be an answer in search of a question here. I don't see where anything I posted has anything to do with what you replied. I am not cheering for anyone here. I just think that it is interesting that the GPL advocates are calling for the heads of anyone who may have capitulated to the patent claims being asserted by Microsoft in regard to the FAT file design. Realistically there does not seem to be any way to use FAT files without using (and infringing upon) the FAT design.

On the other hand, there doesn't seem to be anybody with standing interested in suing GPL users for licensing the FAT patents as a defense against Microsoft suits. Is the Linux code even registered for copyright? I could not find it. Torvalds has registered the trademark, I know, but what about the code? Who could actually sue on this issue?


reply via email to

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