| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
The trouble with OpenBTSThe trouble with OpenBTSPosted Feb 24, 2009 22:55 UTC (Tue) by theraphim (subscriber, #25955)Parent article: The trouble with OpenBTS
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants and their agents, officers, directors, employees and anyone acting on their behalf are enjoined from making available on any internet website any algorithm, computer code, software, technical information or any other intellectual property or technical data relating to any base station transceiver This one is hillarious. Freedom of speech for the win.
(Log in to post comments)
The trouble with OpenBTS Posted Feb 25, 2009 10:46 UTC (Wed) by etienne_lorrain@yahoo.fr (guest, #38022) [Link]
IANAL, but they can still use internet FTP sites, FTP to E-mail converter, or even snail mail CDs to anybody... that is compatible with GPL.
The trouble with OpenBTS Posted Feb 27, 2009 1:03 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] IANAL, but they can still use internet FTP sites, FTP to E-mail converter, or even snail mail CDs to anybody... that is compatible with GPL I've never seen the definition of web site come up, but I can tell you law is generally not technical like that, and I doubt a judge would consider "web site" to refer to the HTTP RFC or Port 80 or whatever. He would probably say it means things you access via web browsers, which is a very common way to access an FTP site. Snail mail would be covered if you ordered it via a web page. As an example of the non-technical definitions courts sometimes use, last year a judge found that "megabyte" meant 2**20 in some Seagate capacity claims, even though there's a technical specification that says it means 10**6. (Ergo buyers of the drives didn't get all the space they bargained for).
The trouble with OpenBTS Posted Feb 27, 2009 0:52 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants and their agents, officers, directors, employees and anyone acting on their behalf are enjoined from making available on any internet website any algorithm, computer code, software, technical information or any other intellectual property or technical data relating to any base station transceiverThis one is hilarious. I take it you've never seen a gag order before? Because these are extremely common in cases like this and a well recognized exception to freedom of speech. There thus is nothing even mildly amusing here. I was impressed by the atypical restraint the judge observed in 1) limiting the gag to web sites -- the information isn't totally locked up; and 2) he continues, "unless they gather and preserve the names, ..." which means it's even OK to distribute it on a web site. (I presume the idea is that if it turns out the recipients owe Martone money, Martone will be able to find them and collect).
|
|
||||||||||||