Federal Court Throws Out IBM's Motion to Dismiss Daniel Wallace's GPL Lawsuit

Strategic Insights -

The federal court in Indianapolis has ruled in favor of Daniel Wallace, a pro se plaintiff who has been suing the open source community over allegations of antitrust violations related to the General Public License (GPL). After initially dismissing IBM's motion to dismiss Wallace's suit with prejudice, the judge has now allowed Wallace to proceed with his amended complaint. Wallace is seeking a summary judgment against IBM, Red Hat, and Novell, claiming that the GPL is a naked per se antitrust horizontal price-fixing violation.

Wallace's lawsuit alleges that the GPL is designed to destroy non-conspiring competitors and that it deprives him of future revenues. He claims that the GPL has no pro-competitive market purpose and is a patent unreasonable restraint of commerce. The judge's decision has allowed Wallace to move forward with his claims, which could potentially have significant implications for the open source community.

Key Takeaways:

  • The federal court in Indianapolis has ruled in favor of Daniel Wallace, allowing him to proceed with his amended complaint against IBM.
  • Wallace is seeking a summary judgment against IBM, Red Hat, and Novell, alleging that the GPL is a naked per se antitrust horizontal price-fixing violation.
  • Wallce's lawsuit claims that the GPL is designed to destroy non-conspiring competitors and deprives him of future revenues.
  • The judge's decision has allowed Wallace to move forward with his claims, which could potentially have significant implications for the open source community.
  • Wallace has accused the Free Software Foundation (FSF) of using the GPL to try to destroy Microsoft and has claimed that the GPL defines a new copyright regulation that is in contravention of US law.
  • Red Hat and Novell are also trying to get the case dismissed, claiming that the GPL is a vertical maximum price restraint and that Wallace hasn't managed to allege an anticompetitive effect.

Statistics:

  • Wallace has until September 9 to wait for IBM's response to his summary judgment motion.
  • The GPL has allegedly displaced capitalist production of some software, according to Wallace's claims.
  • Wallace claims that the GPL "has no pro-competitive market purpose whatsoever except to destroy non-conspiring competitors who allow their commodity computer programs to be set by unimpeded free market forces".
  • The judge has not ruled on the combined Red Hat-Novell motion yet, but it is likely to be treated similarly to IBM's motion.

Sources:

  • [1] decision, Wallace v. IBM, United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, No. 1:21-cv-03077-SA (2022).
  • [2] amended complaint, Wallace v. IBM, United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, No. 1:21-cv-03077-SA (2022).