Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

Oracle and redesign | 126 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

Oracle and redesign

Authored by: stegu on Friday, April 20 2012 @ 06:45 AM EDT

It is at least reasonably accurate to say that
*Oracle* has not redesigned any of the Java APIs.
It was Sun who did most of the trial-and-error
stuff with the mistakes, most notably in JDK 1.0
and 1.1, before JSE settled reasonably firmly in
the form we see today. Oracle has not done a lot
in terms of redesign - yet.

Weasel words again, and again we see Google not
catching it. They need to be better on their toes.

Overall, this witness smells from inaccuracy,
and some of it may be deliberate. The mention
of the $7.4B figure in particular seems staged.
Oracle needs that figure to be flouted before
the patents part of the trial starts, because
the patents are now basically all dead, and
this witness seems to have been given the explicit
task of mentioning that number "as if by accident".

The jury cannot unhear it. Mission accomplished.
Not that I think it will make a big difference,
but still.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Oracle and redesign - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 20 2012 @ 07:13 AM EDT

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )