The cases against MAPS say essentially nothing about what any court
accepted except at the vaguest sort of level. No court decided
anything beyond pre-trial matters in any of the suits against MAPS.
All those cases proved is that it is a bad idea to beg to be sued by
companies that might do so with no intention of ever going to trial.
Pre-trial rullings are court decisions, they address issues like
'is there a set of facts which could allow a claim of this sort
to succeed'. As such they are not 'vague', they address the exact
issues being discussed here.
Pre-trial is where questions of law get decided. So saying 'no court
decided anything except questions of law' does not help when you
are debating a question of law.
The collateral damage issue only gets raised in a handful of early cases.
then it just goes away. I think there is a reason that none of these
cases would come to court, they simply don't need to.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg