Re: MP3 decoder packaged with XMMS
On 7/13/05, Michael K. Edwards <m.k.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
> For the latest word (AFAIK, IANAL, TINLA) on the subject from the
> Federal Circuit en banc, I recommend Knorr-Bremse v. Dana,
> http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/Fed/011357v2.html . This
> ruling reversed the district court's finding of willful infringement
> on very precise grounds:
Stupid me. Not reversed. Vacated and remanded. Note also that the
DC didn't err in light of the applicable law at the time, it's just
that the FC decided en banc that the rules of the game needed revision
due to changes in the "conceptual underpinnings" of the precedents for
"adverse inference".
IANAL, but I would guess that the only remotely likely prospect of
further weakening the "due care" standard in the foreseeable future
would be to argue before the Supremes that, if it's worth breaching
stare decisis on these grounds, it would be better to go even farther
as argued in Judge Dyk's dissent. Personally, I would not want my
financial well-being to hinge on such a test case.
Oh, and while we're on the topic of the Federal Circuit and patents
that should never have been granted -- does anyone know whether the
district court ever ruled on remand in Amazon.com v.
Barnesandnoble.com? Looks to me like Amazon settled out of court,
after losing their preliminary injunction on appeal, to avoid having
the 1-Click patent invalidated altogether. But it's hard to tell
without paying for a full PACER search, as the press lost interest and
the Western District of Washington doesn't exactly make its files easy
to search for free.
Cheers,
- Michael
Reply to: