encforceability of Open Source Licences (Re: (OT) - NOT A Major Blow to Copyleft Theory)

[Alexander Terekhov]

On Feb 11, 2008 3:25 PM, Michael Poole <mdpoole at troilus.org> wrote:
>
> Tzeng, Nigel H. writes:
>
> >>From: zooko [mailto:zooko at zooko.com]
> >
> >>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.
> > I guess the question is how close to reality is his analysis.  Given that IANAL
> > I haven't a clue but the responses to his posts have been less than
> > illuminating.
>
> If Alexander Terekhov's analysis is close to any reality, it is a very
> special reality in which he may be the only resident.  I've resisted

I've referred to the report published by copyright.gov and also some caselaw.

> the urge to chip in on his various odd legal claims in this thread --
> he has shown before that he is willing to argue longer than I am, he
> tends to repeat points that were already raised and addressed (perhaps
> because he's too busy trolling to bother remembering the thread at
> hand), and I'm too busy to research topics like legal arcana that have
> nothing to do with my day job -- but in my previous dealings with him,
> his claims have been specious: they may appear to be well-backed, but
> they have deep, inherent flaws.

Hand waving.

>
> His comments in this thread are remarkably similar to things he has
> said before in other places.  One less-than-amusing tendency of his is
> to make posts that are almost related to the point at hand, but which
> usually leave gaps where readers are expected to supply key parts of
> his argument (such as how they apply to the case at hand).
>
> As one example of old tricks returning: When Rick Moen suggested that
> Terekhov test a theory on downloaded items, I was just waiting until
> Terekhov mentioned the Windows XP downloads again.  I'm not sure how
> "The rest 14 copies went to Debians" was meant to be parsed, but the

Yeah, that indeed must be sorta mind-boggling to you.

> message he linked to does not show that he sent any copies to Debian
> users or developers -- quite the opposite (which seems to be an
> instance of him leaving those critical gaps for us to fill in).

Ignore "critical gaps" and concentrate on a download openly resold on
ebay, then.

Recall also:

http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/01/msg00163.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/01/msg00166.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).