You're usually great with gadget news and whatnot, but you might want to leave legal analysis to others with the background for it as you've misinterpreted Judge Ware's order.
First, it kind of is a big deal that Spring's motion for the preliminary injunction was denied as it serves as an indication of the strength of Spring's case.
Judge Ware's job wasn't to adjudicate whether or not the nook was developed independently of Spring's information. Thus your "nutshell" summation is rather flawed.
I won't get in to all the criteria involved in determining whether it's appropriate for a preliminary injunction to issue, but suffice it to say a multi-pronged test is involved.
Judge Ware effectively looked at only one of those prongs (is the plaintiff likely to prevail at trial on the merits) and found that Spring's case didn't meet the standard required. Thus no analysis was needed of the remaining prongs involving public interest, balance of equities, etc.
The X-Fi3 keeps with the company's commitment to audio fidelity, thanks to the apt-X codec, which supposedly offers audio quality similar to a wired connection when streaming. On that front, the device also handles FLAC files.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Ross,
You're usually great with gadget news and whatnot, but you might want to leave legal analysis to others with the background for it as you've misinterpreted Judge Ware's order.
First, it kind of is a big deal that Spring's motion for the preliminary injunction was denied as it serves as an indication of the strength of Spring's case.
Judge Ware's job wasn't to adjudicate whether or not the nook was developed independently of Spring's information. Thus your "nutshell" summation is rather flawed.
I won't get in to all the criteria involved in determining whether it's appropriate for a preliminary injunction to issue, but suffice it to say a multi-pronged test is involved.
Judge Ware effectively looked at only one of those prongs (is the plaintiff likely to prevail at trial on the merits) and found that Spring's case didn't meet the standard required. Thus no analysis was needed of the remaining prongs involving public interest, balance of equities, etc.