In GN’s video the law firm mentioned there are 3-4 cases already and they are probably getting combined or go to the same judge. (IANAL; IDK the specifics)
In GN’s video the law firm mentioned there are 3-4 cases already and they are probably getting combined or go to the same judge. (IANAL; IDK the specifics)
Anecdote from my first job (software engineering): New manager wants to know what our team does and how our process and software works. Like, he really really wants to know it!
Okay, I book a timeslot and prepare some slides and an example; we have a meeting. I go over the high level stuff, getting more and more specific. (Each person on our team was responsible for end-to-end developing bootloaders for embedded HW.) When I got to the SW update process and what bit patterns the memory needs to have and how the packets of data are transmitted, he called off the meeting and I’ve never seen him since.
I guess, he didn’t want to know THAT much after all.
It’s not about losing a license. ARM’s angle was that Nuvia’s license was for the server market. Qualcomm had their own license for the mobile chips. ARM’s issue was that the chip was developed under one license and sold/manufactured under another. (At least the first version)
But adblockers don’t enable unlawful enrichment. Or do they?