Talk:Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc.

Accounting

What I would like to understand is how the accounting of such licenses is counted? If Autodesk claims that the license is never transferred then are they paying taxes on thoses assets? I am sure that individuals are depreciating the initial purchase costs and Autodesk is paying taxes on the revenue but shouldn't they be required to pay the taxes on their assets?

Sources

A lot of the article discusses the ruling and the meaning of the ruling based on primary sources. For example the "Conflicting precendents" and "Implications" sections need this. We need to start digging out some reliable sources that talk about this. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 17:57, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

POV

This article reads like a public relations stunt by EFF or some other group that seeks to overturn the 9th Circuit's decision in Congress or the Supreme Court. I am personally a big fan of EFF and their work but I think this is a misuse of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.214.163 (talk) 20:40, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:14, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

ninth circuit case

I am surprised this article is labeled as a Western District of Washington case when there is no corresponding article for the Ninth Circuit appeal and the article gives equal treatment to the lower court and the Ninth Circuit opinion. In my opinion these two articles should be separated or this one should be renamed and reindexed as a Ninth Circuit decision. Smerdyakov911 (talk) 16:45, 10 November 2021 (UTC)