[citation][nom]Stevemeister[/nom]If Yahoo is only making revenue of 1.2 BN a quarter in "Revenue" (that's revenue not profit for the financially illiterate) then how the hell do the companies that are suing Yahoo figure they lost what amounts to $2.7 BN in "profit". This is the same country that allows Carlos Slim to become the richest man in eth world because he is fucking the average Mexican with exhorbitant phone rates because TelMex has no substantial competition in Mexico. That's beloved patriot math for you![/citation]
I am not arguing in favor of yahoo or the ruling, but I am wondering how someone as "Literate" as you assumes that the plaintiffs are claiming to have lost $2.7 billion within a single quarter or even a single year. And, just cause one company can't generate revenue, does not prove that it did not in some way prevent another company from generating substantial revenue. Once again, I am not arguing against or in favor of either party. I am just saying it's nice to be logical when making arguments! (Android is free and does not bring any direct revenue to Google. Yet if Android did not exist, Apple would be making buck loads more money selling at least twice as many iPhones! Even if you consider indirect profits Google is making through indirect revenue generated by Android, by means of apps and Ads, don't you think Android caused more lost revenue to Apple than it generated for Google?)