Subject: And I can turn them off, even if Apple won't show me how.

From: Milligan Rudolph <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 00:23:09 -0400

ERMX Jumps 12.5% and Volume Goes Through The Roof!

EntreMetrix Inc. (ERMX)
$0.18 UP 12.5%

Big news last week pushed investors to the table. Wallst.net release of
an audio interview got them excited. This is only the first day after
the release. Act fast and get on ERMX Tuesday morning!

It is highly unlikely that the patent holder would receive a preliminary
injunction, as they are highly unusual in patent infringement cases to
begin with.

They have an email system to notify you if new applications are listed.
But as for requests for admissions, I can tell you a little about what
they are and how they work, so you'll understand what is happening. The
now-infamous study was performed by Pamela Jones of Groklaw, and its
methods and conflicts have seen much comment since then.
And that's why you may have noticed that Microsoft's patent saber
rattling this year elicited yawns, jokes, and anger, particularly after
the KSR decision altered the patent landscape. The sanctioned side had,
in opposing a motion to dismiss,  represented to the court that it had
"plenty of evidence" to support its opposition, and hence the motion was
denied. We have a solution here for you that gets you clean, gets you
square with the use of Linux without having to go into the courtroom.
KARRENBERG: He'll be in, in just a secdond. That, I reasoned, would make
it an easy gig.

it's called monopoly money. The USPTO wants to find out if the public
can be helpful in finding prior art.

So that if a third party distributor was found to have engaged in
conduct that contributed to an end user's infringement, that person
would also be liable, under the copyright laws.

The law calls it libel.

If it turns out that SCO never owned the copyrights, well.
Jacobs is making an arcane point and the judge is right there with him,
getting the point almost before it's made.

"With regard to factual contentions, sanctions may not be imposed unless
a particular allegation is utterly lacking in support.
Further, their product can indeed be easily stopped because they have
complete distribution control over it. It's comical to read about the
MIT deepdivers, a story she swallowed whole as well: SCO hired three
separate teams of code experts, including a group from the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology.
Waters: The copyright, that's right.
again our goal is not to litigate. Here's why: Linux runs on anything
from a wristwatch to a supercomputer.

There has never been a patent infringement lawsuit against Linux, by the
way, something else Microsoft can't claim about itself. It's never been
tried before, to let the public provide input into the application
process.

JACOBS: Half an hour. I believe this is a resurrection of the smear
campaign against me and Groklaw.
You'll find a lot of exhibits referenced, and to give you a hand,   I've
 added links to those documents, so that is a change from the original.
This might, presumably, encourage OEMs and users to give up on Google
and just use Microsoft's search engine since it's already running and
can't be removed. As you see, Red Hat was painted as liable for
infringement or contributory infringement.

again our goal is not to litigate.

It's rare for a patent holder to get an injunction, especially against a
smaller competitor, just because of anti competitive terms. If not, what
might we all conclude When they are finished, they can dust each other
off and walk off friends.
You have the direct, line by line code that is showing up in there, and
it's very stark. So Microsoft's search is still favored:The agreement
doesn't cover "Explorer" search windows found in operating system window
panes.
The Tim O'Reilly video explains a bit about the USPTO difficulties and
why they are asking for help.

And people would actually print it as if it were true. So what is the
first step? Further, their product can indeed be easily stopped because
they have complete distribution control over it.
The now-infamous study was performed by Pamela Jones of Groklaw, and its
methods and conflicts have seen much comment since then. And if you
happen to be using Microsoft's new operating system, the one thing you
simply can't afford to suffer is performance. The music is "My Life
Changed" which you can read about here. McBride: Well, this is a
complicated arena we're talking about here. That may or may not be the
case here, but it's how it often is.
"Likewise with patent infringement, if you are held to infringe a
patent, there's no windfall. Specifically, from our perspective, I would
add that  a large part of the problem is that there is no FOSS prior art
database, although the Linux Foundation is working on one as we speak.
Thank you, Cora Beth.

I also think this is worth doing because it's training, free training in
prior art searching, and these days, I'm a-thinking that might come in
handy. So, in order for you to understand the issues, I'm reproducing
those sections.
THE COURT: Your argument is that that didn't survive? THE COURT: Your
argument is that that didn't make it into the final agreement?
And most especially thank you to Groklawers, for helping me with your
ideas on how to do a video.
There is a lawyer listed on SCO's team that I don't recall seeing
before, Mark Chaney. And the guy is really good at what he does. So not
only does LinuxInsider and DiDio get it wrong factually about who did
the study, they get wrong what the study found too. THE COURT: But he
said IBM once, too. The law calls it libel.

IBM has echoed the same arguments.

It's not a surprise that Judge Dale Kimball thanked the lawyers for
their "efficient arguments" and  their "brilliant briefs", and I'm sure
he's enjoying this high level of skill as much as we are.