No, you don't know his agenda. While I expect this to be overturned on appeal, he is correct that AT&T is not a party to the suit, although I wouldn't be surprised if they filed a friend off the court brief.
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bill Johnson [00000047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu] Sent: Friday, June 3, 2022 11:06 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC It’s AT&T’s shop. They decided they wanted IBM’s products instead of BMC. Imagine your shop with multiple vendors where the vendors decide not to replace each others software. THATS illegal. Restraint of trade. I guarantee it’ll be overturned. But, we know your agenda. You’re an IBM hater. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Friday, June 3, 2022, 10:55 AM, zMan <zedgarhoo...@gmail.com> wrote: Um. AT&T's approval or otherwise isn't relevant. They're not a party to this. On Fri, Jun 3, 2022 at 10:41 AM Bill Johnson < 00000047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > I doubt IBM acted without the approval of AT&T. > > IBM rejected the decision and said it intends to appeal the ruling. > > "This verdict is entirely unsupported by fact and law, and IBM intends to > pursue complete reversal on appeal," IBM said in an emailed statement. "IBM > acted in good faith in every respect in this engagement. The decision to > remove BMC Software technology from its mainframes rested solely with AT&T, > as was recognized by the court and confirmed in testimony from AT&T > representatives admitted at trial." ® > > It’ll be reversed. > > > Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone > > > On Friday, June 3, 2022, 10:37 AM, zMan <zedgarhoo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > https://secure-web.cisco.com/1xJhnZCNeW7_rNin7h4BrhTJh2FKKfaVZoJRtvyBUBiorGShjv3uXoDQVoj41wa3xbw9Du5kLyl_Z3H3CSox90qbGwoIudpZ9NwBtsj0xdkoDwvmWOquUzQkeFu0AfjrJ2a_9BgRpXLwr3VwahvERxN-Sigw6qYPotjrQB1e8apAXdF06ZWmt8Utbx-iG-DexdrckZDein6ub17mp1YDhbqO1SAqXIcnFIEi7D3teVf_BD08Z0ExjAKiuqRgKYRVThnXwEQGOFJ9UgZ9Tb_YaOrL2oXOs1ZrptDwMQlr-VG6JvZbNDruBTpXDD3UzLKzQm4TAb1zyCIJUTC98FZWNgnXqsJJ6D2CZC_AYuRh0HTFU0oSyWJBlzBvExCGziJFd5zJBgqxEgiADr10VcdQ6ekazrWhbLwueSB365b0dFRBk0WCNaG1ot_3VIgEOCOog/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theregister.com%2F2022%2F05%2F31%2Fibm_ordered_to_pay_16%2F > > Tsk. IBM appears to have been caught red-handed here. > -- > zMan -- "I've got a mainframe and I'm not afraid to use it" > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- zMan -- "I've got a mainframe and I'm not afraid to use it" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
