No You Can't Sue For Anti-Trust Violations From Two Decades Ago
from the statute-of-limitations dept
A year ago, we noted that Jerry Kaplan had suddenly scooped up the rights to his famously failed pen computing startup, Go, and and sued Microsoft for antitrust violations. At the time, we wondered if there was some sort of statute of limitations on suing for antitrust violations. Turns out that was a good question to ask. A court has dismissed the case, noting that some of the accusations go back 20 years. They say Kaplan can file a new lawsuit if he focuses on any harm Microsoft has done the company in the last four years -- which still seems rather open ended. Since the company hasn't existed in quite some time, what's to stop him from claiming it would have been a great success over the last four years?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Crime pays
And accepting a cnet report of a Microsoft characterization of judge's decision doesn't show a lot of healthy skepticism. 20 years ago Jerry was creating Lotus Agenda with Mitch Kapor, and GO hadn't been founded, so I doubt the judge characterized the claims as more than 20 years old.
And you failed to note the updated cnet story "A California state claim by Go remains." So there is still a chance to see Microsoft punished for its damages (and Jerry to get rich :-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Crime pays
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
why people sue each other so often
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: why people sue each other so often
We COULD have had lame OSes from DEC, IBM and the like for thousands of dollars. Too bad we lost all of that and got useless Windows that runs about $100. What a shame.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And so are the REST of you MORONS who act like we give a shit about the fact that you POSTED and WHEN.
STFU
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reply to me here and I'll get back to you.
No Fat Chicks or Uglies need apply!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
what is wrong with people
What is the world coming to? Soon people will be suing because someone took part of their air or something.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: what is wrong with people
How would you like if scalding hot coffee burned your inner thighs and genetalia?
Google for McDonalds coffee law suit and read about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: what is wrong with people
To answer your question it would suck to get burned by coffee, but it would be my own fault for the spill if I remove the lid to do something to the coffee.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: what is wrong with people
To answer your question it would suck to get burned by coffee, but it would be my own fault for the spill if I remove the lid to do something to the coffee.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Original Ideas
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Actually...
They're all idiots.
Yeah...
And, no, I'm not saying they should get away with unethical/illegal behavior. But it seems like people tend to expose their jealousies on these companies/people.
Here's a suggestion. Make a billion dollars and then you can be sued too.
Oh, and "YO!"...I think you hit submit on the wrong site. Heh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ZOMG!
j/k
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's not so simple
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
McDonalds Coffee Lawsuit
Yeah, people like their coffee hot...but coffee that can cause instant 3rd degree burns is not hot, it's scalding.
Please before you just say "some dumb bitch spilt coffee in her lap and then sues" get the facts:
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: McDonalds Coffee Lawsuit
They serve their burgers nuking hot too, but you don't see someone wiping their fucking forehead with one and then suing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: McDonalds Coffee Lawsuit
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: McDonalds Coffee Lawsuit
She was not driving, she was the passenger. Also, the car was not moving. Get your facts straight.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm all for suing Microsoft. And Google. Oh, and George W. Bush. And anybody else who has more money and/or power than me.
They're all idiots.
Yeah... "
I'm saddened to know that we share the same name.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is the weirdest line of comments I have ever
To the adults:
Remember that Microsoft et al have teams of lawyers on retainer, so each additional suit imparts little additional cost to them. These guys rarely win. Remember that even the McDonald's coffee guy got his award drastically reduced on appeal.
To the children:
24!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Even after...
If someone had spilled it on her then yes I would say she did the right thing suing but to have spilled it on herself...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
leeches
As for the McDonalds thing, it is completely her fault. McDonalds was right in assuming people would drink it at work as it's been show how careless people are when driving as they devote attention to eating, tuning the radio, talking on the cell phone. Maybe if she would focus her attention to driving (which is what you're supposed to do when behind the wheel of a motor vehicle), she wouldn't have dumped hot coffe in her lap as it should have been in a drink holder anyway.
So, because she has bad driving habits, and apperently quite clumbsy, she's entitled to millions??
Remind me to sue the maker of my razor next time i cut myself shaving... there's not reason for them to be that sharp!!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tort reform...
If you don't think there are frivilous lawsuits in this country, then you are ignorant.
I'm no huge fan of McDonalds or Microsoft, but what's right is right... No matter how big you are, how much money you make, how many people you employ, how much you donate...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tort reform...
The point of the original post you responded to was to illustrate that public opinion and that facts are sometimes not in alignment (wow, imagine that). You may still not come to same conclusion as the jury, but I believe the point was made.
Next time leave your imaginary "liberal" straw man at home in your closet. If you need to get off on blasting some more "spewing liberals" (spew- nice falacious and cheap tactic there), pull him out have your way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sueing ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Real Tort Reform
Who said they were liberals? If you don't know how much profit McDonald's makes, feel free to ask a conservative who was or is a McDonald's manager.
"what's right is right"
Exactly. A reasonable person takes a certain amount of risk and accepts responsibilty when they are burned. They expect coffee to be hot based on past experience. When McDonald's serves coffee that is MUCH hotter than a reasonable person can expect, they should make it known. The fact is that McDonald's was warned repeatedly that they were serving coffee WAY hotter than people were expecting and there were some serious injuries. They refused to do anything.
If these people knew that the coffee was being served at temperatures that would immediately cause 3rd degree burns, they would have known to handle it with more care.
Imagine if you got a rental car and the first time you touched the gas at all, the car took off at the highest acceleration possible. You'd get in a car wreck immediately. Wouldn't the rental agency be at fault? You have a reasonable expectation that the car will perform a certain way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ahhh... I see...
I'm just sick and tired of people not having any personal accountability, and being rewarded for it.
P.S. What's wrong with profit? Isn't profit what you're left with after the government takes a bunch of your money?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ahhh... I see...
I'm just sick and tired of people not having any personal accountability, and being rewarded for it.
P.S. What's wrong with profit? Isn't profit what you're left with after the government takes a bunch of your money?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dang...
bye bye
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dang...
Differing opinion is what this country was built on (like I said, you can still disagree with the jury's conclusion), but if you say things like "spewing liberals" and expect them to stand on their own then I think you're being naive. You seem like a smart person, don't have a temper tantrum and run away on my account. Take your medicine like a man! Or explain to me why I'm wrong without personal attacks!(I tend to be wrong alot, so I'm used to it)
btw- I like the "preschooler" posts, they tend to be very funny.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Coffee WARNING
CAUTION - CONTENTS HOT!
PLEASE SEE FORD WARNING LABEL.
New Ford warning label:
CAUTION - VEHICLE VIBRATION DURING OPERATION MAY CAUSE UNEXPECTED/UNINTENTIONAL RESULTS. PLEASE DO NOT OPEN COFFEE LIDS WHILE OPERATING THIS VEHICLE.
New EXXON Gasoline Warning label:
PLEASE DO NOT CONSUME COFFEE WHILE PUMPING GAS. THE FUMES MAY CAUSE TEMPORARY DIZZINESS AND CREATE AN UNINTENTIONAL COFFEE SPILLAGE.
Should I go on???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Coffee WARNING
Sure, if you enjoy hyperbole.
I can do it too: Why don't we get rid of all warnings? We could save tax money by not putting signs out warning people of highway repair. It should be obvious, right? Why are we wasting money by listing the side effects of over the counter drugs? Drugs have side effects. People should just know that. They should read the fine print if they want to know that it kills pregnant women.
No. That's not how it works. Reasonable people have reasonable expectations. If someone wants you to take an abnormal or extraordinary risk, they should disclose that fact. If not, you won't know to take the right precautions.
If fumes at an Exxon station are such that people easily get dizzy, there SHOULD be a warning. What kind of moron expects to get dizzy every time gas is pumped?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ahhh... I see...
I'm tired of people expecting individuals to be accountable when a corporation endangers them willingly for profit. There needs to be both personal accountability AND corporate accountability. There is no corporate accountability because they control the PR and the media.
P.S. I didn't say there was anything wrong with profit. You implied that the 2.7 million figure was gross, not net. That's easily the amount of net profit on coffee for McDonald's in two days. Punitive damages to corporations are generally too low to actually produce the desired effect, not too hight.
Why should a person go to jail for endangering others and a corporation simply pays a fine that's barely a slap on the wrist?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ahhh... I see...
"I'm tired of people expecting individuals to be accountable when a corporation endangers them willingly for profit"
I'd agree if that statement held true to the McDonalds case. The tabacco industry falls under that heading. But McDonalds, because their coffee is hotter than everyone else? You REALLY think McDonalds sat around devising this brilliant plan to burn it's customers so they'd become repeat business????!!!
Fine, most places keep their coffee at 140 degrees or whatever the "agreed upon" temperature is for coffee (not sure what world wide consurtium came up with the official number...???) How many people order drinks at this temperature and gulp them right down??? They probably don't because IT'S TOO HOT!!
It's not that we should get rid of all warnings, it's that people should actually pay attention to warnings that are already there. If something is HOT... don't treat it like it's kool aid or a frosty. I'm not sure about you, but i don't care if something's 140 degrees or 180 degrees... i don't want it in my lap.
Stop signs...how many times a day do you see people roll through them... or red lights. Keep hands and feet inside ride at all times... everyone pays attention to that right? You've never crossed the street with the "Don't Walk" light illuminated right?? You wear rubber gloves every time you clean with harsh chemicals right? Ever stand on the very top of a ladder??? These companies don't tell use EXACTLY how dangerous it is to do these things... their coporate greed insidious!!!
Warnings are there... people just need to actually read them and maybe tax what little common sense they might have... and perhaps they'll make it through this death trap of a world the corporations have brought upon us.
Now if you'll excuse me, i have to go sue McDonalds cause they made me fat... ????????
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Ahhh... I see...
140 degrees is hot, 180 degrees is a hazard and it's negligent not to warn others. 3rd degree burns are extremely serious. Go ask a nurse. Food that can cause 3rd degree burns should not be sold, and it correctly no longer is.
How old is this thread? Jiminy! :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Ahhh... I see...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Ahhh... I see...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thats Right, FU
40th Post!!!
STFU,Yourself!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
McDonnalds ??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RE: McDonnalds ??
next time, try reading some of the comments...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: RE: McDonnalds ??
And that's why if you're going to sell scalding food/beverages, you should properly warn them so they know not to treat is like a normal cup of coffee. This is a pretty simple concept.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
$10! No.
Hmmmm just a few things here - buying the equipment is a one time expense. Its maintaining it that adds to cost. Ive know several people who have worked at mcdonalds and can tell you for a fact that they are NOT making 10/hour. Nowhere near. Theyve all been paid minimum wage, no more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
-Bjorn Bayley
VP North American Expansion IKEA (1985-1990)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MS Suing the little people
1. quit using windows an use something else.
or...
2. Have a hit team break into the MS board meetings...start shooting the penis' off the board members till MS stops being a prick.
Choose.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Look at it this way, if you didn't pay a ticket fine when you were 16 years old, then 20 years later when you are 36, the police come knocking at your door then take you off to court and fine you for it, would you feel like it is just?
This particular reason is exactly why a statute of limitations was put in place. Indeed, this is a misdameanor offense and not anti-trust but come now people, 20 years before suing is rediculous.
This is just another case of a guy who isn't doing too well on his finances making a dollar off of a large corporation. I wouldn't be surprised if following up to this lawsuit, he was in his home trying to think of a way to get easy money.
no one was hurt here, if he was he would have sued long ago.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
????? Russ
...and the McDonald's lady wasn't thinking the same thing?????????????????? How many Millions did she spend on her hospital bill??? 2.7? Doubtfull.
I don't think anyone here said that the CONTENT of the court cases were the same; it's their motive that's in question. Easy money!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ????? Russ
Just ask the nurse above who may not be able to read a simple question, but probably knows how much hospitals charge.
It wasn't until they found out that it was a continuing problem and McDonald's was purposely not doing anything about it that they sought punitive damages. What's punitive to McDonald's? Anything that would be punitive to them would make the lady rich.
Unfortunately, the appeals court lowered the settlement to an amount that didn't even faze McDonald's. My guess is that they didn't like the idea of the burned lady getting rich.
It seems nowadays that if a person breaks the law or hurts someone, public opinion is to harshly punish them, while if a business breaks the law or hurts someone, public opinion is to ignore it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Godwin's Law Corollary
[ link to this | view in chronology ]