Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Wallace's Second Anti-GPL Suit Loses

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the e-for-effort dept.

Enterprise OpenSource Magazine is reporting that Daniel Wallace's second Anti-GPL lawsuit has gone down in flames. From the (short) article: "The judge wrote that 'Antitrust laws are for 'the protection of competition, not competitors.' In this case, the GPL benefits consumers by allowing for the distribution of software at no cost, other than the cost of the media on which the software is distributed. 'When the plaintiff is a poor champion of consumers, a court must be especially careful not to grant relief that may undercut the proper function of antitrust.' Because he has not identified an anticompetitive effect, Wallace has failed to allege a cognizable antitrust injury.'"

6 of 303 comments (clear)

  1. Judge, not only made correct decision, but gets it by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What surprises me is not that Wallace was laughed out of court. That was almost certain for various reasons. What did surprise me is that the judge's comments showed that he really understood the GPL and its role in ensuring a competitive marketplace.

  2. Who is Daniel Wallace? by beefstu01 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm just curious-- who is this Daniel Wallace character, and what does he have to do with the GPL? What prompted the suit? I read the Wikipedia page and there wasn't much on him other than his two suits were thrown out.

  3. Re:Interesting take at Groklaw by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's this thing called contingency fees. If you have a decent case, you can find an attorney who will take the case for a percentage of any judgement or settlement you receive.

    If your case is crap, it's unlikely that you will find such a lawyer. You might not think your case is crap, but trust me on this, if you can't find a lawyer to represent you on contingency, it's crap.

    If the stakes are not high enough to interest a lawyer, there's this other thing called Small Claims Court. In Small Claims, there is a level playing field, because the other side is not allowed to hire a lawyer to represent them in court. Similarly, you are not allowed to use a lawyer to sue in small claims.

    Anyway, what alternatives would you suggest to fix these perceived issues with the justice system? The system is not perfect, but I have yet to see a proposal that isn't worse than the problem it purports to address.

    --
    It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  4. Re:Who is Wallace and why did he sue? by mangu · · Score: 5, Interesting

    All I could find about him in Google is that he is a physics teacher and a member of the FSF. This raises the question: did he lose on purpose? The whole thing was done so ineptly and without apparent motivation to win that one wonders if he's just trying to work some judicial precedent for the GPL.

  5. Re:Who is Wallace and why did he sue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    He used to be a member of the FSF but that was
    long ago.

    The last few years he has been in any board he could get into trying to prove the GPL wouldn't have a chance in a court of law and, basically, being laughed at.

    He probably couldn't take the laughs any more and he tried to prove he was right.

  6. Re:Who is Wallace and why did he sue? by arivanov · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Plausible, but least likely.

    He had lost 2 lawsuits already and has been ordered to pay costs on at least one.

    The average lawsuit costs in the US this will bankrupt a maker of WallaceOS right away so he has to have some bigger sponsorship to be still alive.

    Who is paying this guy's costs?

    --
    Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
    http://www.sigsegv.cx/