John Meyer wrote:
Thomas W. Cranston wrote:
Harold Fuchs wrote:
Off topic but of interest, I think.
http://software.silicon.com/webservices/0,39024657,39165435,00.htm
Harold Fuchs
London, England
I doubt that there are any significant errors on the subject in
Wikipedia, or Microsoft would already be serving them with a lawsuit.
What's where I think you would be wrong. United States law in terms of
a lawsuit is very generous towards the publisher as opposed to the
defamed. In addition to the requirement of proving falsehood, Microsoft
would also have to prove malice on Wikipedia's fault, and that the
falsehood was material (claming that Open XML was simply a bloated
format I doubt would be enough).
Then there's the fact that Wikipedia can largely be described as a
communications forum rather than a publisher, which by an large I
believe renders them immune to lawsuits according to current law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Actually, I think that Microsoft would sue, whether or not they had a
good case. In American law the guy that has the biggest war chest can
intimidate the guy that is short on funds. If you or I advanced a
frivolous law suit, we or our lawyer would be in trouble, but if a major
corporation files one, well thats OK.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
