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

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

Re: Sharing the GPL source code, with value addition by vendor specif


From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: Sharing the GPL source code, with value addition by vendor specifictohis hardware?
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 16:03:52 -0000

David Kastrup wrote:
> 
> Alexander Terekhov <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > RJack wrote:
> >>
> >> On 10/13/2010 9:30 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> >> > Hyman Rosen<address@hidden>  writes:
> >> >
> >> >> On 10/13/2010 8:17 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> >> >>> Hey Hyman how is the progress to get the source code for a
> >> >>> refurbished Insignia player you so badly needed some time ago,
> >> >>> silly?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> <chuckles>
> >> >>
> >> >> Nothing yet. This is, of course, why the SFLC is still pressing
> >> >> its suit against Insignia. If it gets to trial, Insignia will be in
> >> >> the rather odd position of having promised to comply with the GPL
> >> >> in its manual. Sounds like promissory estoppel to me.
> >> >
> >> > Promissory estoppel is a defense, not a complaint.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Really?
> >>
> >> Google <"promissory estoppel is a cause of action">.
> >
> > Poor dak should go directly to
> >
> > http://everything2.com/title/gratuitous+promise
> >
> > "In the case of promissory estoppel, the party trying to weasel out of
> > an agreement is "estopped" from asserting any of the usual defenses to a
> > contract: no agreement in writing, lack of consideration, that sort of
> > thing.
> 
> So just try to remember _who_ is trying to weasel out of an agreement.

I fully agree that busybox folks collectively have a valid breach of
contract (agreement) claim against Insignia for failing to provide a
(pretty useless but still) replica of source code.

The problem with the claim is that busybox folks have no actual damages.

If I were a judge I would award Eric Andersen nominal contractual
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damages

"Nominal damages

On the other hand, nominal damages are very small damages awarded to
show that the loss or harm suffered was technical rather than actual.
Perhaps the most famous nominal damages award in modern times has been
the $1 verdict against the National Football League (NFL) in the 1986
antitrust suit prosecuted by the United States Football League. Although
the verdict was automatically trebled pursuant to antitrust law in the
United States, the resulting $3 judgment was regarded as a victory for
the NFL. Historically, one of the best known nominal damage awards was
the farthing that the jury awarded to James Whistler in his libel suit
against John Ruskin. In the English jurisdiction, nominal damages are
generally fixed at £2."

and impose attoney fees and sanctions on SFLC/SFC crooks for filing a
copyright (not a contract) suit.

regards,
alexander.

"Plaintiff Erik Andersen is a work-from-home father who has gifted 
to the world software underlying a significant body of consumer
electronics." ROFL
                     -- SFLC crooks Ravicher, Williamson, Spiegel
                
--
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]