|
|
|
| Authored by: Ian Al on Thursday, April 26 2012 @ 11:29 AM EDT |
Google have pointed out that Oracle have presented evidence of copying of only
one class.
They also pointed out that little or no evidence has been presented that Oracle
own the copyrights on all the individual asserted documents.
They have also pointed out that several of the 51 originally accused packages
are not owned by Oracle or that they cannot assert the copyright. The jury
cannot assume that, when Oracle bought Sun, they bought all the copyrights
because Oracle's evidence says otherwise.
The judge has already pleaded for simple questions to be put to the jury. This
is not a good foundation for an agreed list by all the parties.
I think my opinion is far more likely than yours: the judge will definitely do
something.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: ftcsm on Thursday, April 26 2012 @ 11:31 AM EDT |
Why would the judge complicate his own life? He can just judge
on non-compliance of the procedures and cut a great part of
the judgment without great risk of being overturned by an
appeal.
Flavio
---
------
Faith moves mountains but I still prefer dynamite[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Kilz on Thursday, April 26 2012 @ 11:36 AM EDT |
IANAL but Oracle has already rested its case. So it cant
bring in new evidence, it can only bring up things on cross
examination that were brought up in the direct examination. I
have a feeling Google will stay far far away from any
questions that will enable Oracle to fix this on cross.
Likewise the rebuttle can only focus on the testimony of the
and evidence that Google has brought forth. Not introducing
things that could solve the catch 22 that oracle finds
themselves in.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
