3 ms·
Looks like Cisco did not sign either. 9 of the largest 15 IT companies in the world are US owned[1] Looks like 5 of them did not sign up (HP, Amazon, IBM, Dell
by alex- 10y ago
Looks like Cisco did not sign either.
9 of the largest 15 IT companies in the world are US owned[1]
Looks like 5 of them did not sign up (HP, Amazon, IBM, Dell and Cisco) and 4 did (Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet and Intel)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_information_technology_companies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_informatio...
- dragonwriter 10y agoAmazon, as one of the plaintiffs in the case (the State of Washington is the first named plaintiff; the "et al." on the case title means there are others, which include Amazon and Expedia), can't file (alone or with others) an amicus brief, which is a brief by interested non-parties. But it's misleading to count them as a company that choose not to sign on to the amicus brief.
- flexie 10y agoYou are right that they have made separate declarations of support, but are they plaintiffs? I think 'et al' refers to the sole other plaintiff, the state of Minnesota: http://stmedia.startribune.com/documents/1lori020217.pdf http://stmedia.startribune.com/documents/1lori020217.pdf
- dragonwriter 10y agoYou may be correct; I've seen a number of articles specifically claiming Amazon and Expedia joined the lawsuit (which has a clear and well accepted meaning), but on review there are also a lot claiming that the relation and there involvement is somewhat different, and I can't immediately find any definitive documentation of their joining as plaintiffs (they clearly weren't initial plaintiffs). Their involvement by any of the reports may still be of a kind to make it inappropriate for them to be amici, and they clearly support Washington (and Minnesota) substantively in the case, at any rate.
- flexie 10y agoYes, they do.