Some people just never give up. Take, for example, the case of a guy who didn't like open source software because it made it more difficult for him to sell software. Last year, he sued the Free Software Foundation, claiming that the GPL open source license was "invalid" and was "fixing prices." It didn't take long for that case was dismissed. The guy also filed a case against IBM, Red Hat and Novell, which a judge also tossed out while trying to explain to the guy the finer points of antitrust law, including the fact that you need to actually show how the market has been harmed. The judge noted that just because one competitor can't compete, that does not prove the market has been harmed at all, saying: "Antitrust laws are for 'the protection of competition, not competitors.'" Apparently, that lesson didn't sink in, and the guy appealed. But it should come as no surprise to find out that the Appeals Court has also dismissed the complaint, while once again trying to get across to the guy that just because he hasn't figured out how to compete, it doesn't mean that open source software is anti-competitive. The court notes numerous examples of companies who have been able to sell against free or open source products to show that open source software does not, inherently create a monopoly position at all. Hopefully we've now heard the end of such cases, but given his persistence so far, I wouldn't bet on it.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Feds Insist It Must Be Kept Secret Whether Or Not Plaintiff In No Fly List Trial Is Actually On The No Fly List
- Documents Show LA Sheriff's Department Hired Thieves, Statutory Rapists And Bad Cops
- Unarmed Man Charged With Assault Because NYC Police Shot At Him And Hit Random Pedestrians
- Judge In No Fly Case Explains To DOJ That It Can't Claim Publicly Released Info Is Secret
- German Court Says CEO Of Open Source Company Liable For 'Illegal' Functions Submitted By Community