Re: SFLC: "a penumbra"

[Alexander Terekhov]

I find it rather interesing that this recent instance of "a penumbra"
blah-blah filed by the SFLC is basically copy and paste from Eben's 
SFLC underling Dan of PubPat brief in LabCorp v. Metabolite.

http://www.pubpat.org/assets/files/AmicusBriefs/PUBPAT_LabCorp_SCt_Brief.pdf

The Supreme Court dismissed LabCorp's petition for certiorari as 
improvidently granted in a one-line per curium decision. As explained 
in the dissent, the "technical procedural reason" for the dismissal 
related to an alleged failure by petitioner LabCorp to litigate §101 
issue in the proceedings below.

In this case neither petitioner Microsoft nor respondent AT&T had and
has any problems with §101 whosoever.

So what is Eben hoping for?

regards,
alexander.

-- 
"So now they're going to try the hard work of cracking 'Freedom'. Free,
well that means stuff you don't pay for"

     -- Eben Moglen ("Moglen: How we'll kill the Microsoft Novell deal")