[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Tom Tom and Microsofts Linux patent lock-down ..
From: |
Rahul Dhesi |
Subject: |
Re: Tom Tom and Microsofts Linux patent lock-down .. |
Date: |
Sat, 4 Apr 2009 16:37:25 +0000 (UTC) |
User-agent: |
nn/6.7.0 |
Rjack <user@example.net> writes:
>The CAFC's copyright decisions are utterly irrelevant to U.S.
>copyright law. The fact that "the CAFC ignored it's own precedent"
>simply demonstrates your confused mind since the CAFC has no
>copyright law precedent.
Rjack is assuming that stare decisi applies only to binding precedents.
But actually, stare decisis refers to a much broader principle that
essentially says that the law ought to be stable and predictable. In
this broaer sense, stare decisis will make the CAFC's ruling persuasive
to and, as a practical matter, essentially binding upon, every other
court in the US. Courts will rule differently from the CAFC only if they
see the CAFC's ruling as somehow grossly erroneous.
--
Rahul
http://rahul.rahul.net/
- can't charge for GPL software .., (continued)
- can't charge for GPL software .., Doug Mentohl, 2009/04/11
- Re: can't charge for GPL software .., Alexander Terekhov, 2009/04/11
- Re: can't charge for GPL software .., Chris Ahlstrom, 2009/04/11
- Re: can't charge for GPL software .., Doctor Smith, 2009/04/12
- Re: can't charge for GPL software .., Hadron, 2009/04/12
- Re: can't charge for GPL software .., Doctor Smith, 2009/04/12
- Re: Tom Tom and Microsofts Linux patent lock-down .., dr_nikolaus_klepp, 2009/04/11
Re: Tom Tom and Microsofts Linux patent lock-down .., amicus_curious, 2009/04/04
Re: Tom Tom and Microsofts Linux patent lock-down ..,
Rahul Dhesi <=