[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Novell-MS Pact: Mono blah-blah

From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: Novell-MS Pact: Mono blah-blah
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 12:41:34 +0100

David Kastrup wrote:

[... GPL _software_ copies ...]

> But it is a hurdle that one can't blame Easterbrook for.  

Wallace's claim has absolutely nothing to do with software COPIES 
(material objects), retard. And Easterbrook got it. As for blaming 
Easterbrook... first off, it wasn't an appeal from a summary judgment. 
He should have remanded the case back to the district court alone on 
the grounds of his observation that "Although antitrust law serves 
the interests of consumers rather than producers, the Supreme Court 
has permitted producers to initiate predatory-pricing litigation" and 
let Wallace and/or IBM et al move for summary judgment. Due process, 
you know. Instead, EASTERBROOK invented a theory (Williams theory; 
derivative of Wallace theory) and ruled himself on its validity 
affirming that it's faulty. That's very exciting and entertaining, 
but that's not what Wallace paid ($455) for.


reply via email to

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