[linux-elitists] SCO stuff, of course

Adam Kessel adam@bostoncoop.net
Mon Aug 4 19:39:36 PDT 2003


On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 12:18:34PM +1000, Michael Still wrote:
> GROKLAW's commentary on this issue (http://radio.weblogs.com/0120124/) is
> really good as well:
> ...
> Well, he's beside himself being scornful about Red Hat seeking a
> preliminary injunction.  

Groklaw goes on at great length about Red Hat seeking a preliminary
injunction, but I see nothing to suggest that it was Red Hat is seeking.
The complaint asks for (1) a declaratory judgment, (2) permanent
injunctive relief, and (3) money damages.  Normally, if you were seeking
a preliminary injunction, you would point it in the complaint.

Does anyone else have any information that suggests Red Hat is actually
seeking a preliminary injunction?

It seems that perhaps the Groklaw writer is similarly confused about the
difference between a preliminary injunction and a declaratory judgment;
cf:

http://radio.weblogs.com/0120124/2003/08/04.html#a169

> OK, they filed in the U.S. District Court of Delaware. They are asking
> for a preliminary injunction, which is the fast track way to get a judge
> to rule on whether or not you are guilty of something without having to
> wait for a long, drawn-out trial.

I don't want to be nitpicky about all this, but I assume -elitists are
generally comfortable with nits.  Assuming we're going to be a first line
of information dissemination, we ought to be careful to be accurate.
-- 
Adam Kessel
http://bostoncoop.net/adam
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://allium.zgp.org/pipermail/linux-elitists/attachments/20030804/0f997409/attachment.pgp 


More information about the linux-elitists mailing list