A Judge to decide on if ‘All means All’
Just for a bit of theological humor. It seems a judge will finally decide if ‘all means all.’
“Martinez’s ruling hinges on the claim that the box set included ‘all’ of the James Bond films.
The defendants claim that the word is open to some interpretation, and qualifies as advertising ‘puffery’ which is not subject to litigation.
Johnson’s legal team countered that there is nothing vague or subjective about the word ‘all’.
‘No reasonable person, unless a James Bond expert, would understand that ‘all’ does not mean all, and ‘every’ means only certain films,’ the lawyers wrote.
In his opinion, Martinez declined to dismiss the claim at this stage and said a jury would have to decide whether the term was misleading.
‘A jury must determine whether a reasonable person would expect Casino Royale and Never Say Never Again to be included in a complete set of James Bond films,’ Martinez wrote. ‘From the defendants’ perspective, this claim will have to Die Another Day.”
Read the whole story at the link below.