On TV.com: Confession: I Like THE BIG BANG THEORY
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 1 of 69:
Next »
Estoppel
Murph, you misunderstand the key point of the "statute of limitations" issue. If AT&T had, indeed, intended that the contract prohibited IBM from publicly disclosing its own inventions (e.g. RCU), then they had the opportunity fifteen years ago to tell IBM not to do it.

They didn't. We can argue why, but that's a separate point.

Instead, IBM continued in the belief that their reading of the contract was correct (again, we could argue why but it's a separate point.) A statute of limitations exists precisely to keep what's going on in Utah from happening: one party to a contract unearths something long dead and buried and takes it to Court after most of the documents have been shredded and half of the original parties are dead, with the rest having long forgotten the details.

That is what a statute of limitations is for: timely resolution of disputes while there's a reasonable chance of getting the story straight.
Posted by: Yagotta B. Kidding   Posted on: 03/12/07 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Estoppel  Yagotta B. Kidding | 03/12/07
Ya gotta be kidding, right?  murph_z ZDNet Moderator | 03/12/07
Sorry Murph....  bportlock | 03/12/07
there is no need to produce any "infringing code"  code_Warrior | 03/12/07
Infriging code  nobodyuknw | 03/12/07
It's a nice court you run....  bportlock | 03/12/07
But it's not an infrinement case...  Erik Engbrecht | 03/12/07
Oh I agree with you....  bportlock | 03/12/07
Thin arguments  Yagotta B. Kidding | 03/12/07
Thin arguments, part II  Yagotta B. Kidding | 03/12/07
Thin Argument....  nobodyuknw | 03/12/07
The REASON for statutes of limitation is ...  George Mitchell | 03/12/07
You have absolutely...  frk3rd | 03/22/07
Readers, go to Groklaw.net  dave.leigh@... | 03/12/07
visit Groklaw if you want to read up fiction  code_Warrior | 03/12/07
Fiction  Yagotta B. Kidding | 03/12/07
however their analysis and comments  code_Warrior | 03/13/07
Transcripts aren't fiction...  dave.leigh@... | 03/12/07
why dont you make some sensible arguments.  code_Warrior | 03/13/07
You're in denial.  dave.leigh@... | 03/13/07
I skip Groklaw and the majority of the people do too.  code_Warrior | 03/13/07
Because you're in denial.  dave.leigh@... | 03/14/07
why move the mouse up to the address bar when I can read your twaddle  stevey_d | 03/12/07
Today's 'fiction' is tomorrow's reality ...  George Mitchell | 03/12/07
Credibility  Tim Patterson | 03/12/07
Nope: wrong on all counts  murph_z ZDNet Moderator | 03/12/07
They have...  Tim Patterson | 03/12/07
A linux license? No, actually, I don't..  murph_z ZDNet Moderator | 03/12/07
It depends on when SCOX is talking.  NetArch. | 03/14/07
What "Paul Murphy" learned from Eric Raymond  junknstuff@... | 03/12/07
Very funny! wink  murph_z ZDNet Moderator | 03/12/07
Yea, just a bit of fun  junknstuff@... | 03/12/07
If I remember rightly...  John L. Ries | 03/12/07
they said it was impossible to write Linux without seeing unix source code  stevey_d | 03/12/07
It's NOT a goddamned myth Murph, that WAS the central clause  stevey_d | 03/12/07
Strong Case  Yagotta B. Kidding | 03/12/07
I suspect...  Tim Patterson | 03/12/07
Ironically Solaris is now GPL  stevey_d | 03/12/07
Actually...  Tim Patterson | 03/12/07
my bad - why do they bother with news where a corp is "pondering" something  stevey_d | 03/13/07
Acid test  murph_z ZDNet Moderator | 03/12/07
Kool-Aid test  Yagotta B. Kidding | 03/12/07
Some more Kool-Aid  dave.leigh@... | 03/12/07
I have read all the court documents that are public  stevey_d | 03/12/07
Potential  Tim Patterson | 03/12/07
Agreed  murph_z ZDNet Moderator | 03/12/07
Oh really?  frk3rd | 03/22/07
Viral licenses  Erik Engbrecht | 03/12/07
Viral licenses  nobodyuknw | 03/12/07
How did you know?  Yagotta B. Kidding | 03/12/07
Ultimately  Yagotta B. Kidding | 03/12/07
Contract vs License  Erik Engbrecht | 03/12/07
Good argument  murph_z ZDNet Moderator | 03/12/07
So?  bportlock | 03/12/07
Payment.....  nobodyuknw | 03/12/07
Upstream  Yagotta B. Kidding | 03/12/07
Now, that's a better argument.  dave.leigh@... | 03/12/07
But IBM didn't violate the interpretation  stevey_d | 03/12/07
LOL  dragosani | 03/12/07
Triumphant  Erik Engbrecht | 03/12/07
Good theory  murph_z ZDNet Moderator | 03/12/07
Good Theory?  glennthigpen | 03/12/07
Shortly after Darl McBride took over at SCO  stevey_d | 03/13/07
logic gap  Lemorel | 03/12/07
yup ...  George Mitchell | 03/13/07
A new career for me!  Demolish | 03/13/07
SCO no wait, CALDERA, oops I mean The SCO GROUP yeah that's the ticket.  srichardson@... | 03/13/07
How much do you get paid for this ignorance, anyway, Rudy?  sweklaweklfwe@... | 03/15/07
Sounds good  completelyot | 03/17/07

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement