[%TAGS (074db819ec% %074db819ec) %]

(074db819ec% subtitle %074db819ec)


(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)chronological(074db819ec% END %074db819ec) (074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Thread(074db819ec% END %074db819ec) 
(074db819ec% IF user.email && action == 'arc' %074db819ec)
(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Reply to sender(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) (074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)to list(074db819ec%END%074db819ec)

(074db819ec% IF user.email == 'j.heald@ucl.ac.uk' || is_owner %074db819ec) (074db819ec% END %074db819ec)
(074db819ec% END %074db819ec)

Russell McOrmond wrote:

Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 13:10:23 -0600
From: Joyce Scrivner <kscriv@earthlink.net>
Subject: Suing the customers

Rockwell, is suing a law firm that is currently suing Rockwell's customers.

  I'm not surprised this is happening.  If SCO can randomly sue people
over claims as a way to politically manipulate the marketplace, why can
other companies not do the same?

As a random sidenote, several submissions in the consultation period for the just-published UK Patents Bill 2004 argued that lawyers merely carrying out their clients wishes should have an exemption from lawsuits for "threats".

ISTR the Patent Office 'regretted' that people now descended to the level of suing professional advisors, but still thought it quite appropriate that lawyers should continue to be held jointly party to any torts perpetrated.




(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Archive powered by(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) MhonArc 2.6.16.

(074db819ec%TAGS [% %]%074db819ec)