|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 27 2012 @ 12:50 PM EDT |
Y'know - the trial is complicated. And having a jury system
for complicated cases has always been problematic. The
justice system isn't really about splitting hairs correctly.
It is more about making it harder to imprison people who are
obviously innocent by not letting judges make that
determination.
I'll just cross my fingers, go to my happy place, and assume
that the rulings will be:
Copyright - not guilty for APIs - fair use, not guilty for
copied files (de minimis). And, minimal relief on appeal
because Java will be considered as a whole. And, not guilty
- APIs are not copyrightable. So, to get anything, Oracle
would need 4 reversals. This seems to be what the trial is
tending towards.
Patents:
Fine, guilty. On the fractional claims still available.
Estimated value...minimal.
-Erwin[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 27 2012 @ 01:16 PM EDT |
I have a strong tendency to agree with what you wrote above,
the whole thing looks like a mockery.
<< What are the jury supposed to do when confronted with
this form? If the judge and the lawyers don't understand the
case, how are the jury supposed to understand anything? They
are given this form with multiple choices and all they have
to do is put in check marks... >>
I was thinking the same thing. I was also thinking that if
they would have left the lawyers in the jury, the whole jury
would now be looking for guidance from those lawyers,
apparently thats why both parties wanted them out.
How is the jury supposed to figure this out?
The jury is not getting paid anything and probably will be
happy just to go home... I just hope they remember about the
phrase "in dubio pro reo ... when in doubt for the accused".
Because there is lots of doubt and it would make their
verdict easy and justifiable. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jbb on Friday, April 27 2012 @ 04:30 PM EDT |
| Sending this to the jury first helps Google. The judge reserved the right to
decide if the SSO of an API can be copyrighted after the jury gives their
verdict. If the jury decides in Google's favor then the judge's decision about
copyrightablilty won't matter (although he may make it anyway). OTOH if the
jury finds in Oracle's favor then the judge has reserved the right to overturn
that verdict if he decides that the SSO of APIs cannot be protected by
copyright.
As you note, this is a very big decision with far reaching
ramifications. Whichever way it goes in this trial, there is a good chance the
loser will appeal all the way to the Supreme Court (if they can). IANAL but
from what little I know, the higher courts don't/can't overturn findings of fact
from a jury. They can only address errors in law. This means that a jury
verdict in Google's favor will be more difficult to appeal than a decision by
the judge on a matter of law. With some luck, Google could get both which would
be even more difficult to appeal.
This is a big deal. We also have a very
smart judge and two very well funded parties. Let's go for the whole enchilada
and got this API copyright nonsense cleared up as much as possible in this
courtroom. If Google wins then we want them to win in a way that makes a
reversal by a higher court as difficult as possible.
---
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 | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
