[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: DLL Copyright

From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: DLL Copyright
Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 14:34:42 +0200

Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> Incidentally, I just saw on Groklaw that Daniel Wallace has had yet
> another claim (this time against IBM and RedHat) dismissed.  He didn't
> manage to allege that IBM/RedHat had done anything which violated the
> law, even after amending his complaint twice.  I wonder how much these
> escapades have cost him.

Wallace: costs and appeal  
by: al_petrofsky          04/20/06 03:50 pm
ruidhmurphy wrote:

> I believe today is the deadline for Dan
> Wallace to file an appeal of his
> dismissal in Wallace v. FSF.

It was yesterday, April 19, 30 days
after the judgment was entered on March
20 (FRAP 3(a)(1)(A)).

> As of this morning, there is no notice
> of appeal on Pacer. Noting that Dan
> tends to file stuff when he's done
> with it (or even before he's bothered
> to proofread) instead of holding off
> until closer to the deadline, I
> strongly suspect he's going to let
> this drop. There is no petition by the
> FSF for costs either. Perhaps they and
> Dan agreed that the FSF wouldn't file
> for any costs if Dan would skip the
> appeal and let the matter drop.

I believe the reason that FSF didn't
file for costs is just that its
collectible costs probably did not
exceed $20.

What can be charged as costs is quite
limited, moreso than I had realized.
See 28 USC 1920.

In this case, there were no subpoenas,
and thus no witness fees nor process
server fees. There were no hearings nor
depositions, and thus no transcribing
fees. The only fee the court charged
anyone was the $250 filing fee that
Wallace paid last April.

I think the only thing FSF could have
billed for is the postage and
photocopying for the 16 documents it
filed and mailed to Wallace.

As for whether Wallace appealed, I agree
that if he were going to do so, he
probably would have filed the notice
right away, in keeping with his
speediness thoughout the case.
Thriftiness also would have been a
reason to file early, because the appeal
fee increased from $250 to $450 on April

However, one reason to wait until the
last minute would have been that he
could have been hoping to see a ruling
from Judge Young on the other case
(Wallace v IBM et al) before the
deadline, and to have the benefit of
knowing what that was before deciding
whether or not to appeal Judge Tinder's


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]