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

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

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library


From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library
Date: Tue, 04 May 2010 16:11:45 -0000

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> 
> On 3/29/2010 3:07 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > Hyman Rosen wrote:
> >> On the contrary, all of my quotes are germane.
> > You quoted nothing in your message.
> 
> On other occasions.

I lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of your statement and therefore I deny it.

Stop ignoring the facts Hyman.

Recall that the FSF itself is on record:

http://www.terekhov.de/Wallace_v_FSF_37.pdf

"In his Response, Plaintiff claims that FSF uses the GPL "to pool and
cross-license [FSF's] intellectual property with others." However, as is
evident on the face of the agreement itself, the GPL is not a "pooling"
or "cross-licensing" agreement. To the contrary, the GPL, which is the
target of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, is a software licensing
agreement under which the GNU/Linux Operating System is licensed to
users. The express purpose of the GPL is to make certain that "the
software is free for all its users." (GPL, Preamble, Ex. A.) In fact,
the GPL itself rejects any automatic aggregation of software copyrights
under the GPL simply because one program licensed under the GPL is
distributed together with another program that is not licensed under the
GPL: "In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the
Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a
volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work
under the scope of this License." Plaintiff's miscaracterization of the
GPL in his Response has no bearing on the resolution of the pending
Motion to Dismiss because the Court can examine the GPL itself. "[T]o
the extent that the terms of an attached contract conflict with the
allegations of the complaint, the contract controls." Centers v.
Centennial Mortg., Inc., 398 F.3d 930, 933 (7th Cir. 2005).  "

Philip A. Whistler (#1205-49)
Curtis W. McCauley (#16456-49)
Attorneys for Defendant, Free Software Foundation, Inc.

ICE MILLER
One American Square Box 82001
Indianapolis, IN 46282-0002
317.236.2100

See also

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/ambiguity

"Courts frequently interpret an ambiguous contract term against the
interests of the party who prepared the contract and created the
ambiguity. This is common in cases of adhesion contracts and insurance
contracts. A drafter of a document should not benefit at the expense of
an innocent party because the drafter was careless in drafting the
agreement.

In Constitutional Law, statutes that contain ambiguous language are void
for vagueness. The language of such laws is considered so obscure and
uncertain that a reasonable person cannot determine from a reading what
the law purports to command or prohibit. This statutory ambiguity
deprives a person of the notice requirement of Due Process of Law, and,
therefore, renders the statute unconstitutional.  "

regards,
alexander.

P.S. "Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the
originality standards required by copyright law."

Hyman Rosen <address@hidden> The Silliest GPL 'Advocate'

P.P.S. "Of course correlation implies causation! Without this 
fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress."

Hyman Rosen <address@hidden> The Silliest GPL 'Advocate'

--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm 
(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can 
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards 
too, whereas GNU cannot.)


reply via email to

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