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
Thinking outside the basket. ...nt | 254 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Thinking outside the basket. ...nt
Authored by: Ian Al on Sunday, June 23 2013 @ 04:29 AM EDT
.

---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid!

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Arthur Andersen being the counter-example
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 23 2013 @ 04:25 PM EDT
The federal government learned its lesson when it indicted Arthur Andersen, won
a conviction, put the firm out of business, affecting 85,000 people who lost
their jobs. While the Supreme Court ultimately overturned the conviction, it was
too late, as the firm gave up it's license as Certified Public Accountants (and
no one would hire a convicted CPA firm anyway). Ever since then, the federal
government has never gone after a corporation in a way that would force it out
of business, but has either accepted financial penalties and consent decrees, or
gone after top-level people. I don't think the government thought Arthur
Andersen would go to trial, and I don't think Arthur Anderson thought they would
lose and what affect that would have. My opinion is that this case is why the
government hasn't taken criminal cases against major banks to trial, which would
likely been driven out of business quickly if convicted of a felony.

[ 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 )