decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
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

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
I would have chosen 42 | 238 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Why not 42?
Authored by: charlie Turner on Monday, April 23 2012 @ 09:43 PM EDT
Because Life, the Universe, and Everything is not properly before this court at
this time?

I agree, though, that I like this judge, too.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Why not 42?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 24 2012 @ 02:29 AM EDT
AFAIK, if you ask people to give you a random number between 1 and
10, the number 7 will turn up significantly more than any other number.

Similarly, when asked for a random number between 1 and 100 the
numbers 35 and *37* will turn up significantly more than the other
numbers.

To me it looks like someone "picked a number out of the air" for the
number of copied APIs.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

I would have chosen 42
Authored by: Ian Al on Tuesday, April 24 2012 @ 03:51 AM EDT
See Ooooooh!

---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid!

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Interesting bit of an arguement.
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 24 2012 @ 07:10 AM EDT
Oracle: Would a Java app run on an Android run?


That would depend on what they mean by a Java app, if they mean a program
written in the Java language (ie, Oracles version thereof where it's not using
any api's at all) Then the answer is yes.. a Java program that uses no API's,
will very likely run on Android. It will probably not be able to do a damn
thing, but it will run.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

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 )