[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [dvd-discuss] Matt Pavlovich WINS in Cal. Supreme Court

At 03:59 PM 11/25/2002 -0800, Michael A Rolenz wrote:

I understand the first part of their statement-that they were deciding on the one issue only. I was referring to "face the music" ....I was surprised that the court would interject slang into a highly formal document and what that portends.

This *is* California, Mike, slang is not uncommon.  Did not Alex Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit recently conclude an Opinion with "The parties are advised to chill"?  (Trust me, he did.)

And "face the music" does not necessarily mean that he's liable, just that he'd have to (possibly) defend the suit on the merits in another forum, instead of avoiding that due to personal jurisdiction concerns.

Reading the dissent I'm afraid you are right about it "may - or may not - foreshadow what the same court's decision will be when it decides the _Bunner_ portion of the case"...the phrases "improper reverse engineering" and"trade secret" popped quite frequently.

Do keep in mind, though, that those issues were not litigated here, and the court was bound to accept as true certain allegations made in the Complaint.  That won't be the case when they get to the Bunner hearing.  It is an open question whether there would be a predisposition to say the same things when the issues are litigated in the Cal. Supreme Court.

James S. Tyre                               mailto:jstyre@jstyre.com
Law Offices of James S. Tyre          310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax)
10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512               Culver City, CA 90230-4969
Co-founder, The Censorware Project             http://censorware.net