[Am-info] Microsoft Releasing Records to Lindows

[Hans Reiser]

John J. Urbaniak wrote:

>Hans Reiser wrote:
>
>  
>
>>This is a bad ruling.
>>
>>First, the ruling is not about whether there is infringement, and they
>>make that clear.
>>
>>The ruling is about standards of proof of injury.
>>
>>What is particularly discomforting about this ruling is that it is not
>>easy to come up with simple well-defined measurement of actual damages.
>>Let us suppose that I came out with Ben & Gerry's ice cream, and I used
>>fancy packages and cheap ice cream.  Suppose I stole 5% of the market
>>from Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream in this way.  Suppose that some of the
>>customers knew which was which and some got confused.  Suppose my ice
>>cream was cheaper, so some customers actually preferred my product for
>>that reason.  Could damage to Ben & Jerry's be "proven" in a manner that
>>would meet the standards of the court?  Probably not, and especially not
>>cheaply and easily.
>>    
>>
>
>I say, "let the buyer beware."
>
>John
>
>
>
>
>  
>
Confusing consumers is not good.  People have too much to do in life 
besides learning about every scamster.   Reputation is important to 
functional capitalism, and undermining reputation by allowing imitations 
of trademarks is bad.

-- 
Hans