|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, October 29 2012 @ 05:18 PM EDT |
Nothing, except that the parent company in this case is in
the US. So it can be held in contempt if its subsidiary
disobeys the US judge.
You could have a reverse situation in cases that would
involve a Germany-based company. But at this mo' at least,
and TTBOMK, German companies are based in reality and have
not succumbed to the lawsuit mania that has grabbed the US-
based software industry.
I have not seen SAP AG in the symmetrical position of Apple
yet; but it could.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, October 29 2012 @ 06:29 PM EDT |
Here we have a case filed in WA, a counter case filed in WI(?),
the two cases merged. While the administration was trudging
Moto decided to hurry things along by suing in Germany.
The German court decided more expeditiously, granting Moto
an injunction if they wanted to apply it against MS.
The US judge has told Moto not to go ahead with the
injunction. IOW he is telling Moto to stay in line, one case at a time,
and no running across the street for side orders.
Moto are entitled to use their injunction in Germany
if they so wish. If they do, Judge Robart is entitled to
hold them in contempt of his court. If you want to know
how to reconcile these positions, ask a lawyer.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 30 2012 @ 06:41 AM EDT |
...and declare it to be a sovereign state with a total poulation of me and my
direct family (let's call it Valhalla), and then I start a company there, then
can I obtain court rulings from the Valhalla court (handed down by myself, as
president and chief judge) that are binding in other countries?
Well, that are binding in America at least?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
