|
More Vernor Analysis |
|
The Grapevine
|
By Owen Wengerd on
Friday, May 23, 2008 2:07 PM
|
|
|
|
As I expected, the Vernor ruling is getting a lot of airplay, and a Google search will turn up myriad discussions on the subject (most, unfortunately, devoid of real value). Here are two links to useful expert commentary:
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Public Citizen Blogs About Vernor Order |
|
The Grapevine
|
By Owen Wengerd on
Wednesday, May 21, 2008 8:33 PM
|
|
|
|
For those of you following the Vernor case, today's order elicited a blog post from Public Citizen, the group representing Vernor in the case. This represents a biased viewpoint from one of the parties in the suit. I will post links to independent legal analysis as I find it.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Crushing Blow for Autodesk |
|
Docket Activity
|
By Owen Wengerd on
Wednesday, May 21, 2008 7:55 PM
|
|
|
|
The court today issued an order denying Autodesk's motion to dismiss the charges in the Vernor lawsuit. Normally such a denial is perfunctory and mundane, but in this ruling the court performs a breathtaking analysis of whether the AutoCAD software was a sale or a license, and reaches conclusions that, if not reversed, are certain to change the face of software sales in the USA. Technically, the scope of this order is limited to simply refusing to grant Autodesk's motion to dismiss the lawsuit, but the implications of the judge's analysis are almost stunning in their rejection of Autodesk's legal claims. I'm sure you will be hearing much more about this order in the coming weeks, as the entire software industry will certainly take notice of this case.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Autodesk, Vernor trade arguments |
|
|
By Owen Wengerd on
Thursday, March 06, 2008 6:25 PM
|
|
|
|
An exchange of arguments in the Vernor lawsuit over the past few weeks begins to solidify the arguments and clarify the strategies of the two parties. First Vernor's attorneys filed a brief in opposition to Autodesk's motion to dismiss the lawsuit, then Autodesk responded.
Vernor's attorneys are clearly challenging conventional thinking as it relates to copyright and software licensing. This is expected, as Public Citizen, the nonprofit group funding Vernor's challenge, has said that it wants to clarify existing case law with regard to software licensing. On the other hand, it's what Autodesk does not argue that I find most interesting. Autodesk seems to have made a s ...
|
 |
|
|
More...
|
|
|
Autodesk Asks Court To Dismiss Vernor Lawsuit |
|
Docket Activity
|
By Owen Wengerd on
Wednesday, January 16, 2008 6:39 PM
|
|
|
|
In a motion filed yesterday, Autodesk argues that the court must dismiss the Vernor lawsuit. Autodesk's legal argument includes some interesting twists, including a definition of "owner" for purposes of the first sale doctrine that will certainly be challenged by Vernor's attorneys. In addition, an accompanying declaration by Evelyn LaHaie of Autodesk's License Compliance department details the interesting history of the AutoCAD Release 14 licenses at issue, including evidence that they had been upgraded to a later version.
There is a lot of fascinating reading here, and I will have more to say on the subject after I've had time to absorb and process it all.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David vs. Goliath |
|
Docket Activity
|
By Owen Wengerd on
Monday, September 10, 2007 5:30 PM
|
|
|
|
AECnews.com reported about a new lawsuit filed by an individual seeking 10 million dollars in punitive damages from Autodesk for causing his eBay account to be cancelled. The lawsuit is a bit off topic for this site, but I think the plaintiff makes an interesting legal argument.
|
 |
|
|
More...
|
|
|