David Kastrup wrote: [... GPL _software_ copies ...]
> But it is a hurdle that one can't blame Easterbrook for. Wallace's claim has absolutely nothing to do with software COPIES (material objects), retard. And Easterbrook got it. As for blaming Easterbrook... first off, it wasn't an appeal from a summary judgment. He should have remanded the case back to the district court alone on the grounds of his observation that "Although antitrust law serves the interests of consumers rather than producers, the Supreme Court has permitted producers to initiate predatory-pricing litigation" and let Wallace and/or IBM et al move for summary judgment. Due process, you know. Instead, EASTERBROOK invented a theory (Williams theory; derivative of Wallace theory) and ruled himself on its validity affirming that it's faulty. That's very exciting and entertaining, but that's not what Wallace paid ($455) for. regards, alexander. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
