Finally some sense in licensing verdicts

By | December 30, 2011
While not the first time judges have issued a 'sensible' verdict allocating damages according to concrete, real losses as opposed to speculated oe extrapolated losses, it's certainly a rare event. What I find particularly startling is that the jury had modified their decision several times in course of the case, suggesting that lawyers were on their way to another big cash win. Hopefully this verdict helps to set a precedent for other download infringement cases claiming outrageous sums of money, and also GMO suppliers who bully small eco-farmers who refuse to buy their products out of existance.

Personally, I'm more worried about GMO bullies than the former case – anti-competitive behaviour stifling the variety of products on the software market is one thing, but anti-competitive behaviour stifling economic diversity, in particular in our food chain, is another far more dangerous thing for our survival as a species.

Company Caught Downloading Competitor’s Software Just Has To Pay The Fee To Buy One License | Techdirt
Here’s an interesting case highlighted by Eric Goldman, involving two competing software companies. One of the companies, Real View, downloaded an infringing copy of the other company’s (20-20 Techno…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.