First off, I'm surprised. I hope Wallace will appeal. As for costs...
--
The award of costs is not a penalty but is a method used to reimburse
an innocent party for the expenses of litigation. Costs include the
payment of court fees for the commencement of the litigation; the
submission of
On Tue, 2006-03-21 at 12:54 +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FNaction=mboard=1600684464tid=caldsid=1600684464mid=355346
http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FNaction=mboard=1600684464tid=caldsid=1600684464mid=355344
(I am posting this on behalf of Richard Stallman, [EMAIL PROTECTED], at his
request. The I below is rms.)
From: Karen Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Commercial code is better: Cedega VS Wine
Date: 7 Mar 2006 16:05:39 -0800
Linønut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
After takin' a swig o' grog, [EMAIL PROTECTED] belched out this bit o' wisdom:
(I am posting this on behalf of Richard Stallman, [EMAIL PROTECTED], at his
request. The I below is rms.)
Sure it is.
And I'm Tony Blair.
Actually, the thought pearls before
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Fri, 24 Mar 2006 22:42:13 +0100:
Merijn de Weerd wrote:
[...]
You have yet to show that setting a price at zero is predatory
pricing.
Wallace on predatory pricing:
---
Predatory pricing
The GPL establishes a predatory pricing scheme.
David Kastrup wrote:
[...]
Completely irrelevant to your previous line of reasoning which you
snipped out again. Really, your smokescreen and quote birdshot
weazeling is most tiresome. You can't cure a wrong argument by
What wrong argument are you talking about? Your fellow GNUtian
ams'
Linønut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
After takin' a swig o' grog, Tim Smith belched out this bit o' wisdom:
In article
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Tim Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(I am posting this on behalf of Richard Stallman, [EMAIL PROTECTED], at
his
request. The I below is rms.)
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Merijn de Weerd wrote:
[...]
Wallace got dismissed because he could not show injury.
Judge Tinder silently ignored Wallace's argument regarding predatory
pricing which is central to antitrust injury in Wallace's case. The
Judge didn't explain
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Fri, 24 Mar 2006 18:59:39 +0100:
David Kastrup wrote:
[...]
So you feel unable to face the facts.
The fact is that the GPL price-fixes IP at zero. The fact is that zero is
below cost of IP creation and hence is predatory. As for the rest,
