|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 30 2012 @ 04:41 PM EDT |
My guess would be that he won't rule at all if the jury rules in favor of
Google. I mean, why would he?
But yes, I see that Google has two ways to win. That can only be good for them.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Monday, April 30 2012 @ 04:46 PM EDT |
If the jury decides for Google, then the Judge will not need to make a ruling.
The motion will be moot.
---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.
"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 30 2012 @ 04:59 PM EDT |
was it copied?
is it fair use?
is it de minimis?
then everything goes to google rule 50 motion for the judge to rule on the
extent of protected elements in whatever works they decide are required?
I do not not how it works though.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: s65_sean on Monday, April 30 2012 @ 05:09 PM EDT |
I think that if the jury finds for Google on fair use and/or de minimus reasons,
then the judge will not make a decision one way or the other as to whether the
SSO of the APIs is protected by copyright.
If I were a juror on this case and I read about it later, I would feel cheated
by the judge. He should have made a ruling one way or the other before the trial
ever started as to whether the SSO of the APIs is able to be protected by
copyright. If the jury finds for Oracle and the judge then rules that the SSO of
the API is not protected by copyright, then I would feel, as a juror, that my
time was wasted and that I had been lied to by the judge. If the jury finds for
Google, and the judge never has to make a decision, I would still feel cheated
as a juror, because my time would not have had to have been wasted if the judge
had made a decision before hand that they weren't even protected by copyright.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
