[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Compliance detection tool
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: Compliance detection tool |
Date: |
Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:31:21 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.92 (gnu/linux) |
Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> writes:
> On 4/20/2010 10:09 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
>> Hyman Rosen wrote:
>>> And how many court decisions have supported the crank
>>> point of view while addressing open licenses?
>>
>> The district court in that same case
>
> Which was overruled.
Let's be fair. An overruled court decision (even if it does not change
the consequences, namely the necessity to comply) is better than
nothing. The usual crank theories here are so wacky that no court would
dare sanctify them even once in an angle irrelevant to the outcome of
the case.
--
David Kastrup
- Re: Compliance detection tool, (continued)
- Re: Compliance detection tool, Keith Thompson, 2010/05/04
- Re: Compliance detection tool, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Compliance detection tool, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Compliance detection tool, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Compliance detection tool, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Compliance detection tool, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Compliance detection tool, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Compliance detection tool, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Compliance detection tool,
David Kastrup <=
- Re: Compliance detection tool, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Compliance detection tool, David Kastrup, 2010/05/04
- Re: Compliance detection tool, John Hasler, 2010/05/04
- Re: Compliance detection tool, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Compliance detection tool, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Compliance detection tool, RJack, 2010/05/04
- Re: Compliance detection tool, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Compliance detection tool, RJack, 2010/05/04
- Re: Compliance detection tool, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Compliance detection tool, RJack, 2010/05/04