Hyman Rosen wrote:
So, it's a complete victory for Jacobsen, including a payment of
$100,000 from Katzer.
For one wrongly decided non-precedential case:
"The freedom of the district courts to follow the guidance of their
particular circuits in all but the substantive law fields assigned
exclusively to this court [patents] is recognized in the foregoing
opinions and in this case."; ATARI, INC., v. JS & A GROUP, INC., 747
F.2d 1422, 223 USPQ 1074 (Fed. Cir. 1984) (en banc)
Note, as is typical for settlements, the case has been dismissed with
prejudice, so that Jacobsen cannot re-file a suit on the same
claims. Note that this does not mean that he lost - quite the
contrary.
You finally got the idea Hyman! When there's a stipulated party
settlement agreement it is verifiable. How many times have you been told
that unverifiable settlement agreements are imaginary? That's been the
thrust of the discussion concerning the GPL. Until the man in the black
robes rules, unverifiable claims or arguments not grounded on
established legal precedent are illusory.
"Captain Moglen scared them out of the water!"
http://www.fini.tv/blog/finishing_line_files/a44f9390355368f87dc47b7ec094f93e-36.php
ROFL. ROFL. ROFL.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
