Re: Justice draws nigh

[RJack]

Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> In gnu.misc.discuss amicus_curious <acdc@sti.net> wrote:
>
>
> > "Alan Mackenzie" <acm@muc.de> wrote in message 
> > news:hsgk3c$2bu$1@colin2.muc.de...
>
>
> > > No.  I would expect MS to identify the files involved, or the
> > > subsystems involved, or whatever.  Enough for the defendants to know
> > > what they've allegedly violated.  Which particular versions of those
> > > files would be immaterial.
>
> > Are you suggesting that the companies that have entered into licensing
> > agreements with Microsoft for use of its patents are doing so out of
> > fear and are ignorant of the specifics?
>
> No, not at all.  The discussion was purely about copyright, not patents.
>
> > That is a rather silly position for you  to take. [....]
>
> You're knocking down the strawman you've created.
I invoked the patent analogy and it is certainly *no* straw man 
argument. It is preposterous to think that any plaintiff could file 
infringement claims over nonspecific, non-identified intellectual 
property whether coprights, patents or trademarks. I realize you 
socialists don't want to acknowledge the concept of specific 
intellectual property but that's just life.

Sincerely,
RJack :)