wouter van ooijen <wouter <at> voti.nl> writes:

> If you don't know why do you comment?

I thought I'll leave this unanswered, but I recently spent a certain amount of
time learning about 'precedents'. During that time I found the references of a
lawsuit brought by m$ against a Linux firm then called Lindows (and now called
Linspire). This was brought (and lost) in Holland, *after* m$ lost a lawsuit in
the US against Lindows. I.e. a Dutch court took a case (and later aquitted
Lindows) *after* their US counterparts set a clear precedent. Nowadays Linspire
has successfully sued m$ in Norway to force them to relent on forced licensing
per-CPU (even on CPUs that do not have *ndows installed). Morale: cheeky people
with deep pockets can and will go after smaller firms, including in Holland, 
and while suing on impossible terms ('similarity' with a dictionary word). 
After giving in, Lindows is now called Linspire, and they are ... partners 
with m$.

Links:

  http://www.linspire.com/lindows_news_pressreleases_archives.php?id=89
  http://news.com.com/Microsoft,+Lindows+face+off+in+Dutch+court
    /2100-7344_3-5210272.html <-paste this after the line above
  http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS9357846289.html
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindows
  
I hope this clarifies why I wrote 'before or after being sued etc'.

I hope I did not offend anyone, it's just the truth as I know it,

Peter P.


-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist