View Single Post
Old 10-25-2003, 01:05 PM  
vicki
Confirmed User
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Deep in the heart o' Texas
Posts: 1,478
Quote:
Originally posted by Kingfish



It is a different claim. The claim as I see it is (You the linker are inducing the direct infringer (the sponsor) to infringe. The inducement to infringe is a different legal theory than direct infringement. As I explained in another thread, I don?t think the linking case is that relevant for a couple of reasons 1. That cased didn?t deal with patent law 2. It was dealing with a different type of relationship between the linker and linkee.
Yes, its comparing apples and oranges
but the point is that I've been able to find no legal presidence, and when there is no legal pres ... they use the closest ones they can find along with existing laws.

there are no laws pertaining to hyperlinking to a site that is under litigation for patent infringement, nor is there a law that says hyperlinking to a site that IS infringeing, is illegal.

how bizarre that they (acacia) would even tread uncharted waters
actually imho after the research and findings i've seen, I doubt they will *shrug*
__________________
If at first you do succeed - try to hide your astonishment.

HR merchant accounts from 3.45%
solid biz since 98
victoriakozub AT gmail.com
skype: victoria.kozub | ICQ: 74296746
vicki is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote