[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: EASTERBROOK's "quick look" on the GPL and Wallace's claim
From: |
Ben Pfaff |
Subject: |
Re: EASTERBROOK's "quick look" on the GPL and Wallace's claim |
Date: |
Thu, 09 Nov 2006 11:35:50 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) |
hollaar@antitrust.cs.utah.edu (Lee Hollaar) writes:
> In article <45536D8E.4C60D8C5@web.de> terekhov@web.de writes:
>>--------------------
>>In the
>>United States Court of Appeals
>>For the Seventh Circuit
>>____________
>>No. 06-2454
>>DANIEL WALLACE,
>>Plaintiff-Appellant,
>>v.
>>INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES
>>CORPORATION; RED HAT, INC.; and
>>NOVELL, INC.,
>>Defendants-Appellees.
>
> The short version can be summed up by this sentence from the opinion:
> "This does not assist Williams, however, because his legal theory is
> faulty substantively."
The opinion only mentions "Williams" in that sentence. Is this a
typo for "Wallace"?
--
Ben Pfaff
email: blp@cs.stanford.edu
web: http://benpfaff.org
Re: EASTERBROOK's "quick look" on the GPL and Wallace's claim, Lee Hollaar, 2006/11/09
Re: EASTERBROOK's "quick look" on the GPL and Wallace's claim, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/11/09
Re: EASTERBROOK's "quick look" on the GPL and Wallace's claim, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/11/09
Re: EASTERBROOK's "quick look" on the GPL and Wallace's claim, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/11/09
Re: EASTERBROOK's "quick look" on the GPL and Wallace's claim, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra, 2006/11/10
Re: EASTERBROOK's "quick look" on the GPL and Wallace's claim, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/11/10
Re: EASTERBROOK's "quick look" on the GPL and Wallace's claim, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/11/10