There's a reason when you bring a lawsuit you only - generally speaking,
barring appeals - get one chance to present your case.
If the Law
requires Oracle to prove they have authorship and they failed to do that, then
that's Oracle's own doing. That is why Oracle's Legal representation gets paid
the big bucks: to know what it is they need to prove and ensure adequate
evidence to prove that.
The Law equally requires Google to present
all their defenses. Would you prefer if Google:
Presented defense
1
Jury deliberates
Presented defense 2
Jury
deliberates
and so on till all defenses are worn out? That seems an
appropriate process to you for handling a case?
Now... whether or not
Oracle was indeed required to prove that point - that's now in the Judges hands
to examine the appropriate surrounding Laws and decide. If Oracle wasn't
required to prove that, then the case proceeds as is with Google providing all
their copyright defenses to the Jury. Otherwise the Judge decides that part as
a matter of Law and the Jury no longer needs to consider copyright infringement
in the damages portion.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
| 
