Subject: RE: OFF-TOPIC - The SCO suit
From: "Lawrence E. Rosen" <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:38:42 -0800

Why would we bother?  We'd be in the same court, with the same attorneys,
and the same issues to resolve, as SCO/IBM are already.  Does the open
source community need yet another lawsuit?  /Larry Rosen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mahesh T. Pai [mailto:paivakil@vsnl.net] On Behalf Of 
> Mahesh T. Pai
> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 3:41 AM
> To: License Discuss
> Subject: OFF-TOPIC - The SCO suit
> 
> 
> A  bit off  topic;  but I  guess that  people  on this  list 
> have  the interest,  resources and  the capacity,  to 
> implement  what I  have in mind, if it can be done at all.
> 
> Please see the following extract from the Indian Copyright Act.
> 
> <begin quote>
> 
> 60. Remedy  in the  case of  groundless threat  of  legal proceedings-
>    Where any person claiming to be the owner of copyright in any work,
>    by  circulars,  advertisements or  otherwise,  threatens any  other
>    person with  any legal  proceedings or liability  in respect  of an
>    alleged infringement of the copyright, any person aggrieved thereby
>    may,  notwithstanding anything  contained  1[in section  34 of  the
>    Specific  Relief Act, 1963  (47 of  1963)] institute  a declaratory
>    suit that the alleged infringement to which the threats related was
>    not  in fact  an infringement  of any  legal rights  of  the person
>    making such threats and may in any such suit-
> 
>    (a) Obtain an injunction against the continuance of such 
> threats; and
> 
>    (b) Recover such damages, if any,  as he has sustained by reason of
>    such threats.
> 
>    Provided that  this section  shall not apply  if the  person making
>    such  threats,  with due  diligence,  commences  and prosecutes  an
>    action for infringement of the copyright claimed by him.
> 
> <end quote>
> 
> Does not the US law have similar provisions??
> 
> Could not any of the copyright  holders to the Linux Kernel sources (I
> understand  that  there  are   several,  since  Linus  does  not  seek
> assignment)  initiate  appropriate  proceedings against  
> SCO's  claims against the several Fortune 500 companies??
> 
> Surely, there is  no claim that _every_ file in  the kernel 
> sources is infringing; so far  as I can understand the  
> pleadings. But, the claim for  royalties ( or  whatever 
> against  the fortune  500 cos)  does not restrict the  claim 
> to  use of the  infringing files. Hence,  the last paragraph 
> (the proviso) has no application.
> 
> There have been enough public statements from SCO's officers 
> to invite such  litigation. I  am  also aware  that  the 
> owner  of copyright  in majority of  the files making up  the 
> kernel sources is  at present in the US .... thus making the 
> job easier ...
> 
> -- 
> +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
>                                           
>   Mahesh T. Pai, LL.M.,                   
>   'NANDINI', S. R. M. Road,               
>   Ernakulam, Cochin-682018,               
>   Kerala, India.                          
>                                           
  http://in.geocities.com/paivakil         
                                          
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3