Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 05 2013 @ 04:28 AM EDT |
That being the case, would not a measure of responsibility typically end up
resting with third parties - particularly if they were the ones creating the
systems (if building and installing software is "creating the infringing
device/environment")?
That is, does it imply that the trolls could then go after a systems integrator
/ IT provider, on the basis that they ultimately "built the machine"?
Perhaps some of the larger SI's should have their say too? It seems madness this
way lies...[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Wol on Sunday, May 05 2013 @ 12:48 PM EDT |
aiui, the appeals courts are there to correct matters of law.
Seeing as that was jointly stipulated, it hasn't been adjudicated and cannot be
cited as precedent.
It's not the place of the courts (original or appeal) to overturn matters of
agreed "fact".
Cheers,
Wol[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 06 2013 @ 05:15 AM EDT |
So my questions, why don't people sell Android capable hardware. Include only
basic software to make calls.
Have people install their own android distribution. Setup the company that
provides software over the internet in a country with sane patent law (no
software patents for a start). Good luck trying to extort millions from
individuals. And if you do, see how support for software patents crumbles even
outside the techie world.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|