Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 24th Mar 2009 10:45 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 354703
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Maybe it would be wise to get a clue as to the role of the DOJ in this? Just a thought.
The DOJ represents the "President's" opinion on how the executive branch sees the issue and would "ask" the courts to proceed. In many ways they are just sticking to the "letter of the law".. at least that's a good political defense when the public lashes out.
On the other hand, they could have "advised" the courts that the fees in a years-old case against an individual do not represent the "intended" application of the maximum penalties. In general a court would take the DOJ's "suggestion" as a pretty good indication of how to rule if the law is subjective.
In this case, they choose to give the "IP nobles" the maximum "pound of flesh" allowed... like in Dickens' novels where the small boy gets killed by a carriage and the parents get sent to debtors' jail because the wheel was damaged, and the noble's suit was bloodied and made him late for an important business deal.




Member since:
2006-04-22
Maybe it would be wise to get a clue as to the role of the DOJ in this? Just a thought.