|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 03:25 PM EDT |
It depends on how it's done. Using the monopoly profits to hire top talent to
develop the application would be OK. Arbitrarily deciding the application was
part of the Operating System and therefore included in its cost wasn't. It
probably gets very technical.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Ian Al on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 04:27 AM EDT |
Yes it is but, this is what the judge had to say about it:
THE
COURT: I hope the reason for my impatience is clear. This case is not about
trying -- about the dominance that Word might have obtained over WordPerfect.
And it's not. That claim is time barred and that ruling is subject to appeal.
And the Fourth Circuit has ruled on it. The Tenth Circuit can do it. But the
fact of the matter is to the extent this is about acquiring or maintaining
monopoly in the operating systems market, and your own client just testified and
your own witness just testified that it was a better product and WordPerfect was
going to use it and it was going to be -- it's clear as a bell to
me...
He is saying that, unlike the middleware issue, the case
about unfair competition between Word and WordPerfect has already been decided.
That case is already over. Anyway, it is now too late for that issue ('That
claim is time barred... ').--- Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid! [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|