[SFLC's Answer] Re: Best Buy countersues SFLC gang

[Alexander Terekhov]

[LMAO!]

Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> 
> "Best Buy Co., Inc. (“Best Buy”), erroneously sued in place of Best Buy
> Stores, L.P. and BestBuy.Com, LLC, answers Software Freedom Conservancy,
> Inc. and Erik Andersen’s (“Plaintiffs”) Original Complaint (“Complaint”)
> as follows:
> 
> [... snip answer ...]
> 
> COUNTERCLAIMS
> 
> Defendant/Counterclaimant Best Buy for its separate counterclaims
> against Plaintiffs Software Freedom Conservancy, Inc. and Erik Andersen
> states and alleges as follows:
> 
> 1. This is an action for declaratory judgment, together with such
> further relief based thereon as may be necessary or proper, pursuant to
> the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202. There
> is an actual controversy between Best Buy and Plaintiffs arising under
> United States copyright laws, Title 17 of the United States Code.

1. Plaintiffs deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 1 of Best
Buy's Counterclaims to the extent that Paragraph 1 alleges Best Buy is
entitled to any relief under the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act.
Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 1 of Best Buy's
Counterclaims that there is an actual controversy between Plaintiffs and
Best Buy arising under the United States copyright laws.

> 
> 2. The subject matter jurisdiction of this Court is founded upon Title
> 28, United States Code §§ 1331, 1338(a), 2201 and 2202.

2. Plaintiffs admit that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction as
alleged in Paragraph 2 of Best Buy's Counterclaims.

> 
> 3. Best Buy is a Minnesota corporation with its principal place of
> business at 7601 Penn Ave. South, Richfield, Minnesota 55423.

3. Plaintiffs are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a
belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 3 of Best Buy's
Counterclaims and therefore denies them.

> 
> 4. Software Freedom Conservancy, Inc. alleges that it is a
> not-for-profit New York corporation with its principal place of business
> at 1995 Broadway, 17th Fl., New York, New York 10023.

4. Plaintiffs admit the allegations of Paragraph 4 of Best Buy's
Counterclaims.

> 
> 5. Erik Andersen alleges that he has a residence in Springville, Utah.

5. Plaintiffs admit the allegations of Paragraph 5 of Best Buy's
Counterclaims.

> 
> 6. Mr. Anderson alleges that he authored, developed and owns the
> copyrights in a computer program called “BusyBox.”

[here comes the definition of "the", LOL]

6. Plaintiffs deny the allegations of Paragraph 6 of Best Buy's
Counterclaims to the extent they assert that Mr. Andersen alleges he is
the author, developer and owner of “[all of] the” copyrights in BusyBox.
Plaintiffs admit that they allege that Mr. Andersen is the author and
owner of copyrights in portions of BusyBox.

> 
> 7. Software Freedom Conservancy, Inc. alleges that it is a copyright
> enforcement agent for Mr. Andersen with respect to BusyBox.

7. Plaintiffs admit the allegations of Paragraph 7 of Best Buy's
Counterclaims.

> 
> 8. Mr. Andersen and Software Freedom Conservancy, Inc. (“Plaintiffs”)
> allege that Best Buy has infringed Mr. Andersen’s alleged copyrights in
> BusyBox.

8. Plaintiffs admit the allegations of Paragraph 8 of Best Buy's
Counterclaims.

> 
> FIRST COUNTERCLAIM
> DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT
> 
> 9. Best Buy restates and realleges each of the allegations set forth in
> the Counterclaim paragraphs 1-8 above.

9. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each of the allegations contained in
Paragraphs 1-8 as if set forth fully herein.

> 
> 10. By filing the instant Complaint, Plaintiffs have purported to assert
> a claim for copyright infringement by Best Buy of copyrights in BusyBox.

10. Plaintiffs admit the allegations of Paragraph 10 of Best Buy's
Counterclaim for Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement.

> 
> 11. Best Buy has not infringed any copyrights in BusyBox.

11. Plaintiffs deny the allegations of Paragraph 11 of Best Buy's
Counterclaim for Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement.

> 
> 12. Best Buy is entitled to judgment that it has not infringed any
> copyrights in BusyBox.

12. Plaintiffs deny the allegations of Paragraph 12 of Best Buy's
Counterclaim for Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement.

> 
> JURY DEMAND
> 
> 13. Best Buy requests a jury trial on all issues triable of right by a
> jury.

Plaintiffs do not request a jury trial.

> 
> PRAYER FOR RELIEF
> 
> WHEREFORE, Defendant/Counterclaimant Best Buy prays for judgment in its
> favor against Plaintiffs/Counterclaimants as follows:
> 
> 1. Dismissing Plaintiffs’ cause of action with prejudice and on the
> merits;
> 
> 2. Declaring that Best Buy has not infringed the alleged copyrights in
> BusyBox;
> 
> 3. Awarding Best Buy its costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees,
> incurred in connection with this matter; and
> 
> 4. Awarding such other relief as this Court deems just and equitable.

Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the Prayer for Relief set forth in
Plaintiffs' Complaint. Plaintiffs deny that Best Buy is entitled to any
relief.

> 
> Dated: New York, New York Respectfully submitted,
> March 8, 2010
> /s/ David Leichtman
> David Leichtman (DL-7233)
> dleichtman@rkmc.com"

Dated: March 29, 2010
New York, New York
Respectfully submitted,
SOFTWARE FREEDOM LAW CENTER, INC.
By: s/ Daniel B. Ravicher
Daniel B. Ravicher (DR1498)
Aaron Williamson (AW1337)
Mishi Choudhary (MC2009)
Michael A. Spiegel (MS2309)
1995 Broadway, 17th Floor
New York, NY 10023-5882
Tel.: 212-580-0800
Fax.: 212-580-0898
Attorneys for Plaintiffs Software Freedom
Conservancy, Inc. and Erik Andersen


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that on the below date he caused a true and
correct copy of the
foregoing PLAINTIFFS' REPLY TO DEFENDANT BEST BUY CO., INC'S ANSWER,
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND COUNTERCLAIMS to be served upon counsel for all
parties via this Court's Electronic Case Filing system.
Dated: March 29, 2010 /s Daniel B. Ravicher
Daniel B. Ravicher (DR1498)  "

regards,
alexander.

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

Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> 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 <hyrosen@mail.com> 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.)