[scoggs]

For someone who is very much on the outside of understanding this situation, if you think you know enough to comment on it overall, would you say that they are mishandling it due to generally misunderstanding the gravity of the verdicts they are handing out or is it more to do with not precisely understanding the technology, what goes into creating such technology, how technology is propagated and improved, and how that diaspora of code and information winds up becoming the open or closed source "fabric" of what we know as computing today?

[DannyBee]

They just think the ninth circuit is wrong. They are reasonably well informed, they just disagree.

People very often make the mistake of assuming two people with the same data will form the same opinion, and that where people disagree, it must be due to not understanding the data/etc.

In my experience, this is very wrong :)

[scoggs]

Thank you. I can totally understand that. I appreciate it.

[DannyBee]

Of course.

I've met the ex-Chief Judge of the federal circuit, Randall Rader, a number of times (he also taught a class i took in law school at GWU).

He's definitely not stupid, is cognizant of how people view his decisions (he said "they loved me when i wrote nintendo vs. atari and hated me when i wrote other things"), and really did believe he is making things better.

Of course, i strongly disagree, but like i said, it's not like he doesn't understand the issues.