Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 05 2013 @ 01:51 AM EDT |
.
-- Alma[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: stegu on Friday, July 05 2013 @ 04:27 AM EDT |
I find the statement "No tribunal has held that..." very strong. The
lawyers for Motorola need to be pretty sure of their case knowledge and search
skills to say that. Or is it permissible to omit the cautious clause "to
our knowledge" in legal briefs and let the opponent try to find
counter-examples? Not that I think there are any, but still, my scientific
training makes that definitive, strong statement of a total lack of precedent
pop out of the page. In my non-legal mind, that's sticking out their neck quite
a bit. Of course, if it's true (which I suspect it is), it is the right thing to
do.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Ian Al on Friday, July 05 2013 @ 04:44 AM EDT |
He is so far from actual US and global contract and patent law that he cannot
regain a position of legal authority.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 05 2013 @ 06:36 AM EDT |
Remember that the judge entertains the theory that a contract preexists by the
mere act of entering a patent into a standard, otherwise we could not be talking
about "breach of contract" in the first place.
So we are not in the situation "initial offer designed to get negotiations
started": a contract already exists. Now you may well claim "this
does not even make sense, this is a contract about making a contract and not
identical with the contract that is supposed to be made in consequence".
Which is quite reasonable. However, remember that the "contract about
making a contract" was made, if at all, with the standards body so
Microsoft would not have had standing to sue for breach of contract in the first
place.
So the sky's the limit for the legal theories this judge will be willing to
entertain on behalf of Microsoft. I don't see how the current state even makes
sense, so your guess is as good as mine whether the next theory will make any
sense.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|