[JURIST] The US Supréme Court [official website] on Wednesday heard its final oral arguments [day call, PDF] of the term. In Limelight Networks v. Akamai Technologies [transcript, PDF; JURIST report] the court heard arguments on whether "a company can be held liable for inducing patent infringement even when no one company has committed direct patent infringement." Akamai Technologies [corporate website] and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology [academic website] sued Limelight Networks [corporate website] over Akamai's patented method for redirecting requests for Internet content to ensure access during periods of high demand. The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held [opinion] that Akamai could sue Limelight even though no single company performed every aspect of the patented method. Akamai contends that Limelight takes all but one step of the patented process and induces its customers to perform the final step. Google, Cisco, Oracle Corp., Red Hat Inc., Symantec Corp. and Xilinx Inc. [corporate websites] are backing Limelight, arguing that a decision for Akamai would leave technology companies vulnerable. The Obama administration is also urging the Supreme Court to rule for
This is the first paragraph of a block quote. It is a decent paragraph, ascribed of justice and goodness.
This is the second paragraph, a rakish and knavish to the extreme, subtly but perceptibly spiraling downward further into the abyss of moral decay.