Should We Follow Novell v. MS in Detail?
e6003 writes "Groklaw has a fascinating article written by a retired attorney. In short, he believes FOSS advocates should be following the recently announced Novell anti-trust case against Microsoft with as much vigour as we do the SCO-IBM case. Whilst the latter is to all intents and purposes settled in favour of the Good Guys, the article points out how Novell v. MS is far harder to call. Evidence produced during this new case, he argues, may be valuable for proving anti-competitive intent on Microsoft's behalf should MS (or a proxy) go on a patent rampage against FOSS. Finally, the article points out that Microsoft either destroys evidence itself (see the Burst.com case) or requires evidence to be destroyed as part of settlements (as in the Caldera DR-DOS case)."
...is that editors be limited to one story about it per week. I'm sorry, but I'm just fed up after the tabloid-like fetish the editors had with the whole SCO thing that most of us didn't give a crap about, at least not on anything near that level. "Darryl sneezes!" "Assistant wipes his nose for him!" "IBM has no comment!" "Groklaw eloquently pontificates!" "IBM says 'bless you', is settlement around the corner?"
Wait- make that twice a week, if you count the inevitable duplicate because the editors can't be bothered to read their own site.
Metaediting, anyone? Jolly good!
Please help metamoderate.
Must... string... together... coherent sentence...
I thought the cliche anti-establishment Linux advocate typically at least had proper grammar...
- money = the root of all evil
- therefore evil = money * money
- therefore j^2 = i^2
- therefore j = i
So they are both as bad as one another? Am I missing something here?Karma? Hey I just call it as I see it.