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

Re: If no enforcement takes place between two parties (GPL) Was: Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

OK, I apologize to all who were involved in this conversation. I will block further emails from "aconcernedfossdev" and no longer encourage him.


On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 9:24 PM, <aconcernedfossdev@airmail.cc> wrote:
These are simply counterpoints the defense would likely contend and one should be prepared for as they could be entertained by a court.

One can certainly contend that to remain silent when any reasonable person would speak if they were in opposition, indicates assent. The court may reject that argument in this case or not.

Well, you are confusing civil and criminal law.

I am not.
I gave that example as a supporting point to the discussion on civil law and equity that is almost farcical extreme example (that courts will, for example, hold you in contempt for not paying a settlement while you are imprisoned and have no way of raising the money, imprisoning the person again and again in perpetuity for contempt again and again (this has changed very recently in a few states, but not most)). This arises often from judgements for non-payment of civil liabilities. That does not detract from this statement:

The court would likely feel that one could represent oneself if one desired. Usually lack of finances is not taken into account by courts; only real incapability (mental or physical or related to one's status as a minor)

Though it is said "one who represents himself usually has a fool for a client", that does not mean one is legally or physically incapable of mounting a case, thus if one does sit on one's cause of action (regardless of finances), laches may apply and the equitable remedies may be found to be out of reach.

On 2017-07-15 02:06, Bruce Perens wrote:
Well, you are confusing civil and criminal law. I assure you winning a
laches defense is no sure thing, nor does it necessarily win the
entire case, it is more likely to only limit the period of the offense
for which the plaintiff may seek damages.

And being a passive participant in Linus discussion is no tacit
license to your copyright rights over what the GPL already offers. If
Linus really wanted that, he'd have to call for opposition, and remove
works of opposing parties from the kernel.

Reply to: