[rektide]

> clickbait at best, misinformation at worst.

why? arguing a point you havent bothered to make is stupid. yiu cant just insult an argument & walk away. 20y is how this horseshit goes with all patents, is a vast delegitimization everywhere. what are you trying to disagree with?

> appealed & overturned

repulsive & heartbreaking, complete neglect of civil & fair society; yeah, we know. the system continues to try hard to legitimize the legal robber barrony bullshit fucked up horseshit that regards only the very wealthy: we know. that's the problem. those at the top are against the public.

[nceqs3]

> repulsive & heartbreaking, complete neglect of civil & fair society; yeah, we know. the system continues to try hard to legitimize the legal robber barrony bullshit fucked up horseshit that regards only the very wealthy: we know. that's the problem. those at the top are against the public.

lmao. Calm down. Who knew you could get so worked up over boring niche elements of antitrust law that you most certainly don't understand.

[rektide]

> get so worked up over boring niche elements of antitrust law

this post is about 233 words of quite upright & moral certitude, of a very real & serious getting worked up about anti-trust indignity that was foisted upon the world by a low & dirty corporation.

yes, it was overturned. by cowardly pro-corporate assholes.

we should be outraged. your attempt to quell reason, to dismiss indignity deeply scored against humanity: it's vile, and literally baseless: you've made no cause, set no reason, other than mockery & personal insult. get out. if you don't want to participate in discussions of civil society, please kindly find someplace else to go piss on & stop being a degrading insulting & abrasive jerk to me. you've said nothing of value, injected no concerns: just belittled & mocked.

"boring niche... antitrust" is in fact a major oppressor & wounds us all. you don't have to agree, but trying to degrade & mock people for caring is low. anti-caring is not a valid response. and it's deeply unkind. if you want to make claims, try to state why you think my concern are overblown: that's fine, make a stance. but just blanketly insulting & degrading someone, writing me off with cheap ad-hominem attacks: that's malicious, and gross.

[mardifoufs]

... sure but have you read the report/appeal ruling? Because otherwise yes I don't think you should this outraged over something that you haven't actually researched.

And I don't know but to me calling the judges "cowardly assholes" is the pretty cheap ad hominen attack here. Especially since if you have made 0 effort to actually read what they said, or understand their reasoning. I also hope you realize judges don't create the laws, so blaming them for applying legislation they have no control over... makes your comment sound even more pointlessly outraged and adds to the moral crusade self righteousness.

[rektide]

I read it, back in 2019.

> Especially since if you have made 0 effort to actually read

Been following & reading tbis avidly for a while mate.

Wild wild overturn here, complete disregard. Ninth circuit living in a fantasy world. One that's terrible for humanity & great for the very large.

[ksec]

And it isn't AntiTrust Law he doesn't understand, but how the Telecom / Wireless Industry and the whole 3GPP Rel process works. Links with counter argument ( if it was even an argument to begin with ) were provided, and that was the response I got on HN.

And it is from a 2007 account.