Re: "GPL requirement could have a chilling effect on derivative distros"

[Alexander Terekhov]

ROFL. 

Uh.

peterwn wrote:
> 
> > Moglen makes extraordinary claims about the GPL, so why doesn't he come
> > forward with the appropriate legal citations?
> 
> There are not any - no one so far has had the guts to say to Eb - 'see
> you in court'.
> 
> > Moglen is a J.D. with a
> > Ph.D. in history and not an LL.M.
> 
> So how did he get admitted to the NY Bar and the Supreme Court Bar
> then?

LL.M is not required for bar admission.

> 
> >He would not even be accepted as
> > qualified for Professorship at many institutions.
> 
> Name a few examples - Yale? Harvard? No, it cannot be Harvard - he had
> a visiting professorship there.  Perhaps some third rate institutions
> may not accept him.

First rate institutions need first rate clowns (but not many). Good for
relaxing from time to time. Moglen is a first rate clown.

> 
> >What qualifies his word alone as "legal authority"?
> If what he says resonates with the judges then he IS a legal authority,

Give me a break. Moglen's track record in court of law is quite telling. 
He was on a losing side of the argument (assuming arguendo that his 
brilliant bullshit rap could possibly contain any arguments) on each 
and every appearance in court of law, AFAIK.

Oh, BTW,

http://www.newsforge.com/software/03/10/30/1927210.shtml%3Ftid%3D150%26tid%3D151%26tid%3D82

"I believe that the legitimate problems of the free software community
 and the equally serious problems of the parties who are concerned about
 the regulatory consequences of their product designs are being studied
 in the appropriate way by all parties. "

How nice. And the GPL section 4 simply doesn't apply because "problems
are being studied", I guess.

"It is well known that the Free Software Foundation does not hold
 copyright in the Linux system kernel program. "

Liar.

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/sco/sco-v-ibm.html

"The Foundation notes that despite the alarmist statements SCO's
 employees have made, the Foundation has not been sued, nor has SCO,
 despite our requests, identified any work whose copyright the
 Foundation holds-including all of IBM's modifications to the kernel
 for use with IBM's S/390 mainframe computers, assigned to the
 Foundation by IBM--that SCO asserts infringes its rights in any way."

regards,
alexander.