Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

[Rahul Dhesi]

Rjack <user@example.net> writes:

[ out-of-context quotes again ]

...
>The freedom of the district courts to follow the guidance of their
>particular circuits in all but the substantive law fields assigned
>exclusively to this court is recognized in the foregoing opinions
>and in this case."; ATARI, INC., v. JS & A GROUP, INC., 747 F.2d
>1422, 223 USPQ 1074 (Fed. Cir. 1984) (en banc).
>http://vlex.com/vid/atari-inc-plaintiff-group-defendant-37649300

Why did you include a non-public link? Because you didn't want others to
see the context? Here's a public link:

  http://www.altlaw.org/v1/cases/410894

The case you cited was one in which the CAFC was explaining why it ought
to follow existing precedent in the circuit where a district court sits
whose ruling is being appealed.

But if there is no existing precedent in that circuit, the above does
not apply. And that's why your quote is out of context and irrelevant.

Here's the important context that you omitted.

  In the trademark portion of this case, we will be guided by the
  relevant law in the Ninth Circuit, to the extent it can be discerned,
  and not require the district court here to follow conflicting rules,
  if any, arrived at in other circuits.
-- 
Rahul
http://rahul.rahul.net/