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
Splitting hairs | 687 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Google had said it wasn't contesting "ownership"...
Authored by: scav on Saturday, April 28 2012 @ 06:03 AM EDT
My guess (IANAL) would be yes. I'm guessing you could choose
not to contest ownership as one of your defences, but still
hold to your right not to be sued over stuff that isn't
properly registered (and therefore unambiguously identified).

---
The emperor, undaunted by overwhelming evidence that he had no clothes,
redoubled his siege of Antarctica to extort tribute from the penguins.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

It's a good question
Authored by: Ian Al on Saturday, April 28 2012 @ 08:25 AM EDT
Both Novell and SCO registered the same versions of Unix. Neither was taken by
the court as proof of ownership of the copyrights.

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

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Google had said it wasn't contesting "ownership"...
Authored by: caecer on Saturday, April 28 2012 @ 10:32 AM EDT
Google is not contesting ownership. But they are contesting that Oracle has
registered (some or all) the material in question. And registration (as well as
ownership) is a legally necessary precursor for court action. Thus Oracle may
own the material, but cannot bring suit over it.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Splitting hairs
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 01 2012 @ 02:02 AM EDT
Maybe Google won't contest that the copyrights belong to Oracle. However it is a
little hard to pin what are the four corners of the entity to which copyrights
apply?

[ 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 )