decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
What are you talking about? | 100 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
What are you talking about?
Authored by: FreeChief on Thursday, August 16 2012 @ 12:42 PM EDT
I was about to point out that it is Apple who puts "Developers" in quotes, and that it is just a way of introducing an abbreviation, as in:
software development companies (collectively “Developers” or “defendants”) who create software applications (“Apps”)
but when searching the documents I found this, which is, no doubt, what you are commenting upon:
10. Answering the first sentence in paragraph 10, Plaintiff admits that some of the defendants and/or “Developers” are smaller than Intervenor. Plaintiff is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 10, and on that basis denies each and every remaining allegation contained in the first sentence of paragraph 10.
You may be right that Lodsys does not want to accept Apple's definition without question, and that does not seem unreasonable to me. In general, it is poor strategy to let your opponent in a argument choose the names for things without question.
Most imperative is to rectify names.
—Confucius [XIII (Zi~Lu) S3]

What seems remarkable about this paragraph is that Lodsys admits it knows nothing about this, and therefore denies it. That seems to be normal practice in law, but, where I come from, if you don't know about something you reserve judgement on it.

Lawyers just call each other liars until proven otherwise. The current author is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation that they are all liars, and on that basis admits it. I know they are prolix.

 — Programmer in Chief

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )