Re: [PROPOSAL] Full text of GPL must be included
John Galt <galt@inconnu.isu.edu> writes:
> See Wollensak v. Reiher, 115 U.S. 96, 99 (1885). See also USC Title 17,
> section 507
>
> * (b) Civil Actions. - No civil action shall be maintained under the
> provisions of this title unless it is commenced within three years
> after the claim accrued.
>
> I think the claim's been sunset.
This only applies to the particular defendant; it does not apply to
others. Since the FSF isn't ever suing Debian, the point is moot
here. The point is that by failing to pursue action here, the FSF
might be granting implicit permission to anyone to do something
similar. Debian probably isn't harming anybody, but EvilCorp might,
and it's that one should be worried about.
The section cited has nothing to do with the question of whether delay
in prosecuting one defendant means that you are estopped from action
against other similarly situated defendants, which is what I'm talking
about.
Similarly, the case you cited (Wanlass v. GE) is about laches in a
patent case, and again, addresses whether a failure to sue a defendent
promptly estops a later suit of that defendant. The answer the court
gave was "yes", but that's not relevant here, because I'm talking
about an inability to sue a different defendant, not the one you
delayed in acting against.
In fact, a patent case is totally not relevant here. The doctrine
I'm citing is that if you ignore it when person A breaks your
copyright, then you might lose the right to sue person B when they
do. This is a general rule, not just one of copyrights. However, it
is a rule that specifically does not apply to patents. If you ignore
the fact that person A infringes your patent, you might lose the right
to sue A, but you will never thereby lose the right to sue B.
Thomas
Reply to: