"ADSK has skirted through the gray area here by retaining Softimage for over 5 years"
"Thereby insulating themselves of any antitrust litigation" and suppose there was a healthy case of evidence contrary to this? with plenty of first hand disgruntled witnesses along the way.. if the facts are there and provable and support that this is blatantly what they intended with the purchase and actually just announced, is that enough to warrant an interest in a court proceedings by litigation lawyers? one of those 'you lose you dont pay' kind of deals (because they start out with enough evidence to win)? because as far as I understand the justice system, it's whomever has the most expensive lawyers wins and one thing AD is not short of is cash.
