|
From: | RJack |
Subject: | Re: Psystar's legal reply brief in response to Apple |
Date: | Wed, 08 Dec 2010 15:58:08 -0000 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.7) Gecko/20100713 Thunderbird/3.1.1 |
On 8/7/2010 2:03 PM, ZnU wrote:
In article<ntmdnTdzHvTqrMDRnZ2dnUVZ_hCdnZ2d@giganews.com>, That's not really an answer. I wasn't asking if the Jacobsen v. Katzer precedent was legally binding on the court hearing the Best Buy case. I was asking, essentially, why I should accept your opinion with respect to whether the terms of a software license are covenants or conditions over the opinion of a federal judge.
You are free to accept anything you wish. Why not read the case decision for yourself? http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17776182574171214893&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr You can easily google the term "condition precedent" for yourself and decide for yourself what it means. If you decide the appellate judge in the Artistic License case was correct then you are thinking for yourself and that's a good thing. As for me, District Judge White who has a professional legal career spanning over forty years http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_White came to a conclusion very different from the Appellate Court. His ruling was consistent with every decision I have ever read concerning copyright licenses (the deciding factor for me) and "conditions precedent". When I question a ruling of an appellate court I carefully research the case law in general in a broad variety of contexts. Perhaps your question could be re-phrased "why should I accept Judge White's opinion with respect to whether the terms of a software license are covenants or conditions over the opinion of another federal judge." Google is your friend. Have at it. Sincerely, RJack :)
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |