Re: EASTERBROOK's "quick look" on the GPL and Wallace's claim

[Alexander Terekhov]

Ben Pfaff wrote:
> 
> hollaar@antitrust.cs.utah.edu (Lee Hollaar) writes:
> 
> > In article <45536D8E.4C60D8C5@web.de> terekhov@web.de writes:
> >>--------------------
> >>In the
> >>United States Court of Appeals
> >>For the Seventh Circuit
> >>____________
> >>No. 06-2454
> >>DANIEL WALLACE,
> >>Plaintiff-Appellant,
> >>v.
> >>INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES
> >>CORPORATION; RED HAT, INC.; and
> >>NOVELL, INC.,
> >>Defendants-Appellees.
> >
> > The short version can be summed up by this sentence from the opinion:
> > "This does not assist Williams, however, because his legal theory is
> > faulty substantively."
> 
> The opinion only mentions "Williams" in that sentence.  Is this a
> typo for "Wallace"?

http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=06-2454_010.pdf

-------
                            Order

    The slip opinion of this court issued on Novermer 9, 2006, is amended
as follows:

Page 2, first full paragraph, line 4, change "Unix®" to "UNIX®";

Page 3, first full paragraph, line 7, change "Williams" to "Wallace".
-------

But EASTERBROOK's "quick look" on the GPL and Wallace's claim stands.

regards,
alexander.

--
http://www.linuxtaliban.com/bilder.htm