|
Authored by: PJ on Friday, October 05 2012 @ 09:20 PM EDT |
You seem to have garbled the facts. Novell won at
the appeals court last time. And the jury
was deadlocked, so there is no "after the
trial" in the sense that there is only a
question of whether a new jury is needed. The
sole judge at the district court level thought
he could take it on himself to decide the winner
without a jury. That is the question at the
appeal level, whether a trial is required.
I don't predict winners. What I have said is
that I think Novell should win, in a fair
universe, because there is no doubt in my mind,
after transcribing all the <i> Comes v. Microsoft</i>
exhibits, that Microsoft messed with them.
And the jury, incidentally, agreed, despite
the judge ruling with what I perceived as extreme
bias against Novell over and over. Even the
holdout agreed Microsoft messed with Novell
and the question that had them deadlocked was
whether there was financial damages to be
awarded. So Novell did convince the jury of
that much, so where do you get off with the
idea that Novell was a loser here? Really am
curious.
But if, by any chance, you are connected in any
way to either of the parties, you have to tell
openly to comment. This is Groklaw, where we
don't pretend.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|