[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Microsoft and TomTom settle

From: Thufir Hawat
Subject: Re: Microsoft and TomTom settle
Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2009 06:24:36 GMT
User-agent: Pan/0.132 (Waxed in Black)

On Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:34:29 -0400, amicus_curious wrote:

> "Thufir Hawat" <> wrote in message
> news:3IJAl.118624$Rg3.97495@newsfe17.iad...
>> On Wed, 01 Apr 2009 08:55:28 -0400, amicus_curious wrote:
>> All it really indicates is that is was likely a term or result of the
>> settlement.  The underlying reason for the settlement can only be
>> speculated.
> YOU can say that, but what would a jury say?  There are a bunch of
> companies licensing the FAT system already and here is a company who
> wanted to fight originally who surrendered quickly.  And you want to
> bank on the infinitessimal probability that it was all a mistake?

Err, why would a jury have anything to say about a settlement?  How could 
this settlement ever be introduced as evidence in some other case?  The 
point of settling is, partially, to avoid a jury.


reply via email to

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