Subject: Re: encforceability of Open Source Licences (Re: (OT) - NOT A Major Blow to Copyleft Theory)
From: "Alexander Terekhov" <alexander.terekhov@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 18:49:34 +0100

On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 5:38 AM, Russ Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com>
FWOMPT-ly wrote:
>
> zooko writes:
>  > On Feb 9, 2008, at 10:27 AM, Robin 'Roblimo' Miller wrote:
>  >
>  > > I agree. This conversation should move to the Closed Source
>  > > Initiative's license-discuss email list. Or the Business Software
>  > > Alliance's. Or whatever they call themselves these days.
>  >
>  > I have found Alexander Terekhov's posts very interesting (especially
>  > recently, as he seems to have toned down the ad-hominem and focussed
>  > his rhetoric), because of my abiding interest in Open Source.
>
> Then you should encourage Alexander to send them directly to you.
>
> The problem is exactly as Larry states it: The only people who know
> aren't talking, so everybody who is opining doesn't know.  While you
> may appreciate speculation, the rest of us think it's a FWOMPT.

Hey Russ, not everyone "aren't talking. "

http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2008/foss-primer.html
(A Legal Issues Primer for Open Source and Free Software Projects)

is just out. Funny reading!!!

"You do not need to register to enforce your copyright. "

From the United states Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
where SFLC likes to file their harrasing suits (just to dismiss
voluntary shortly after filing initial complaint):

"It provides that "no action for infringement of the copyright in
any United States work shall be instituted until pre-registration
or registration of the copyright claim has been made in
accordance with this title." 17 U.S.C. sec. 411(a); see also 17
U.S.C. sec. 501.1 Whether this requirement is jurisdictional is
not up for debate in this Circuit. On two recent occasions, we
have squarely held that it is."; In re Literary Works in
Electronic Databases Copyright Litigation; Nos. 05-5943-cv(L),
06-0223-cv(CON)(2d Cir. Nov. 29, 2007).

No jurisdiction -- automatic dismissal.

More:

http://infotechlawpolicy.blogspot.com/2008/01/second-circuit-vacates-settlement-of.html

regards,
alexander.

--
"Notwithstanding Jacobsen's confused discussion of unilateral
contracts, bilateral contracts, implied licenses, "licenses to the
world" and "bare" licenses in his Appellant's Brief, the issue at hand
is fairly simple."

  -- Brief of Appellees (CAFC 2008-1001).