Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

[Rjack]

Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> Hyman Rosen wrote: [...]
> > In every one of the cases, the plaintiffs demanded that the 
> > defendants comply with the GPL.
>
> Why don't you quote the corresponding passages (demanding that 
> the defendants comply with the GPL) from the plaintiffs' 
> complaint(s)?
>
> Stop hallucinating, Hyman.
>
> http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2007/dec/07/busybox/verizon.pdf
******************************************************************
                    PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request judgment against
Defendant as follows:

(1) That the Court issue injunctive relief against Defendant, and
that Defendant, its directors, principals, officers, agents,
representatives, servants, employees, attorneys, successors and
assigns, and all others in active concert or participation with
Defendant, be enjoined and restrained from copying, modifying,
distributing or making any other infringing use of Plaintiffs’ software.

(2) That the Court order Defendant to pay Plaintiffs’ actual and
consequential damages incurred, in an amount to be determined at trial;
(3) That the Court order Defendant to account for and disgorge to
Plaintiffs all profits derived by Defendant from its unlawful acts;

(4) That the Court order Defendant to pay Plaintiffs’ litigation
expenses, including reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of this
action; and

(5) That the Court grant Plaintiffs any such further relief as the
Court may deem just and proper.
*******************************************************************

THe SFLC has *never* requested the defendants be forced to post the
source code. Hymen sees victories over parties who were never sued
and further claims victories for actions that were never requested
by the plaintiffs in their lawsuits. Next thing you know, Hyman will
be seeing little green men posting GPL'd source code on Mars.

Sincerely,
Rjack :)