Beware of open-and-shut cases

Not sure I agree with the premise.: Etoys was wrong for thinking ETOY was a threat, seeking for punitive damages (especially when they didn't have a case). Microsoft however is right in thinking Lindows is a threat. It's a huge threat. Even if Microsoft doesn't have a case against them (and were punished for thinking that they did).

ETOY was in the wrong to throw all common sense aside in making such an issue about it and not settling. Lindows on the otherhand approached the case sensibly enough to convince a judge how right they were, and there is no proof that they would have destroyed their company like ETOY did had the ruling gone the other way.

Don't get me wrong... I despise greed and unbounded spite - but I think it's wrong to accuse everyone involved in a legal battle of being full of these two vices.; Posted by: daver_z Posted on: 07/29/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Reply to Story Reply to Message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

It certainly won't be you. No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/27/04

Lindows rags to riches crocd | 07/27/04

And that relates how? crocd | 07/27/04

crocd | 07/27/04

Goose meet Gander. No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/27/04

I never thought it was Patrick Jones | 07/27/04

Not my job man... No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/27/04

Etoy vs. Etoys dtobias | 07/27/04

What do you think?

Smart Tech Expert advice on innovations in healthcare and the green technologies that make it happen. Find out more
Smart Business Discussion and advice on management issues that revolve around making your world smarter and more useful. More Smart Advice
Smart People The best and worst moves in the management and strategy trenches. Learn More