Re: Settlements

[RJack]

Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> Hyman Rosen wrote:
> > On 2/25/2010 3:07 PM, RJack wrote:
> > > Troll vs. Hyman's fertile imagination. Troll wins another one.
> > > ROFL.
> > No. They advised the court because they were *in* the court.
>
> Moving targets once again, silly Hyman?
>
> Yes in all previous cases SFLC delayed initial conference and
> motions. But in the current case defendants seem to be willing to
> call the SFLC's bluff in court.

Let's hope the SFLC doesn't file voluntary dismissals and cut and run
once again. The GPL needs a good review by a federal judge. It's obvious
the defendants aren't the slightest bit intimidated by the SFLC clowns.
At a glance, the actual complaint demonstrates to the defendant lawyers
the amateurish nature of the SFLC lawyers. The joinder of the  Software
Freedom Conservacy Inc. is a glaring error. From the context of the
court's summary of the issues, it is also obvious that the defendants'
lawyers know that Erik Andersen is not the owner and author of the
"single computer program" known as BusyBox. The SFLC is heading into a
train wreck on March 8th when the Answers to Complaint are due by order
of the Court. No more delays. May justice reign!

Sincerely,
RJack :)

"[U]nless we wish anarchy to prevail within the federal judicial
system, a precedent of this Court must be followed by the lower
federal courts no matter how misguided the judges of those courts
may think it to be."; HUTTO v. DAVIS, 454 U.S. 370 (1982).

"An unlicensed use of the copyright is not an infringement unless it
conflicts with one of the specific exclusive rights conferred by the
copyright statute. Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken, 422 U.S., at
154-155."; SONY CORP. OF AMER. v. UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC., 464 U.S.
417 (1984).