Talk:Blizzard Entertainment's victory over bnetd sealed in Appeals Court

Sorry, didn't realise I hadn't logged in before I submitted. --Dorian Gray 10:37, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Victory sealed?
There is one thing I don't understand here. How is Blizzard's victory "sealed" when there is still the Supreme Court to appeal? --Deprifry 13:13, September 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * It is unlikely to go to the US Supreme Court unless there is found to be a Constitutional issue. I don't see one here. StuRat 14:00, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Victory?
How can Blizzard be victorous, if the program is already out there? It is like fighting p2p software.

Contest
It looked like a good entry, so I published it with a few fixes:


 * Added location categories.


 * Added authors to the sources, where specified.


 * Changed "cnetd" to "CnetD", the way it was shown in the sources.


 * Shortened title.

Also, be aware that only sources actually used when writing the article belong under the "Sources" section. If you want to list sites for additional info, create a "See also" section and put those there. One last note, the source that misspelled their own title is somewhat suspect for reliability, if they don't catch things like that (loose=not tight, lose = not win).

StuRat 13:57, 3 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I had bnetd over BnetD because I read more sources with the former than the latter, and the Wikipedia page has the article under bnetd (well, Bnetd, but with the disclaimer). --Dorian Gray 14:16, 3 September 2005 (UTC)


 * The official project name is bnetd. Andrevan 03:28, 4 September 2005 (UTC)