|
|
|
| Authored by: PJ on Thursday, April 26 2012 @ 02:13 PM EDT |
It's not a technicality. It's the law. Bryan
is wrong on this one, although most of his
reporting has been excellent, albeit with a
bit of an anti-Google bias.
He doesn't yet understand what this issue
is about, because the lawyers are talking to
the judge in their legal shorthand. That's
why the media yesterday didn't even notice
the Rule 50 motion. I did, but nobody else,
and I truly thank mirror_slap for his incredibly
lengthy notes, because without it, I never
would have been able to notice it either, if
all we had was the media. And of course
that's the value add of Groklaw. We do understand
the legal process, and there is a lawyer and
a paralegal on board. It obviously makes a
difference in trial reporting. But without the
volunteers going to the court, we'd be at a
loss. So it's a group effort, and I'm having
so much fun, exhausting but thrilling.
What a lawyer Van Nest is. But there's miles
to go before we sleep. I'm sure McNealy will
try to rebut Schwartz.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jbb on Thursday, April 26 2012 @ 03:52 PM EDT |
| Oracle's API case is based entirely on classic BS&F tactics that we've come
to know and loathe. They try to keep as much of their case as undefined as
possible and force Google to commit to a defense. After Google commits, Oracle
suddenly switches to a different meaning or definition. They did this with the
original claims asking the judge to force Google to be specific in their
defenses before Oracle was specific in their claims. They've done it all along
regarding the definition of an API. We were in mid-trial when the judge asked
the parties to define what an API really is. They did it again with keeping the
definition of the "selection, structure, and organization" of APIs as vague as
possible. They did it yet again dancing around whether the APIs would be
considered individually or as a whole.
All Google is saying is that Oracle
cannot have their cake and eat it too. Oracle has to pick one story and stick
to it. The thing is that if Oracle hadn't been doing all this fancy footwork
then they would have already lost on this issue and it wouldn't be part of the
jury trial. It is only fitting that Oracle would trip themselves up in their
own fancy footwork.
---
Our job is to remind ourselves that there are
more contexts than the one we’re in now — the one that we think is reality.
-- Alan Kay [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
