Re: Blowhard Bradley Kuhn and his fraud

[RJack]

On 8/12/2010 12:48 PM, Hyman Rosen wrote:
> On 8/12/2010 12:38 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > But RJack's was talking about SFC, not Erik.
>
> So you are alleging that the lawsuit will be dismissed because one
> of the plaintiffs does not hold a copyright while the other does, as
>  opposed to the RIAA lawsuit where each plaintiff holds some
> copyright but not all.
>
> Well, it's a theory. As soon as the court sees it your way, I'll be
> happy to acknowledge that you were right.
>
> But I won't hold my breath, because anti-GPL cranks are forever
> insisting that there are a million things wrong with the
> infringement suits, yet so far, in every single case which has
> concluded, the defendants have come into compliance with the GPL.

Where did anyone allege the lawsuit would be dismissed in toto because
of SFC stupidity alone? Quit makin' up stuff Hyman. To paraphrase Sen.
Bob Dole, "Quit lyin' about my record".

First SFC will be dismissed as a plaintiff because they own no
copyrights at all.

Later on, Andersen will be dismissed because of improper copyright
registration.

Sincerely,
RJack :)