Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Investment Chat Board Lawsuits -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (9086)	11/29/2005 12:13:24 AM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12465

I can just hear Lycos' attorneys after reading Faro's latest filings: "WTF?" Hey, I'm no lawyer, but even I've heard of Lotus Development Corp. v Paperback Software. That's when the court said Lotus' "look and feel" was as much proprietary as their source code and thus Paperback couldn't sell a knock-off simply because the underlying source code was different. Faro cites this case in order to show how Lycos is somehow responsible for its content and thus not immune under the CDA (Communications Decency Act). WTF? I can't even summarize his logic without cutting and pasting the entire section it's so tortured. Unreal. - Jeff