|
|
|
| Authored by: Cassandra on Tuesday, May 01 2012 @ 02:31 PM EDT |
If only McNealy had been asked to define what he meant by "personal
blog". He wouldn't possibly have been able to characterize it as (say)
somewhere for Jonathan Schwartz to post his holiday snaps!
But I'm hoping it doesn't matter: McNealy was no longer CEO by this time. Surely
that makes Schwartz's testimony key?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 02 2012 @ 04:46 AM EDT |
As the judge's instructions say:
Inability to recall and innocent misrecollection are common. Two persons
witnessing an incident or a transaction sometimes will see or hear it
differently.
Perjury involves a deliberate attempt to mislead, which requires much stronger
proof than mere disagreement.
For example, one of my colleagues is insistent that Microsoft can be trusted
because if they were not trustworthy their customers would abandon them, where
my position is that MS cannot be trusted because they have repeatedly been shown
to take action to PREVENT their customers from abandoning them.
I point to examples of this (eg. no option to export email in Office365, bugs in
Outlook 2010 which break roaming profiles with IMAP accounts) but those
rose-coloured glasses are superglued on.
It doesn't mean he's lying, although it could be argued that he's gullible.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 02 2012 @ 08:46 AM EDT |
The witness didn't even see the blog or pay attention to it,
but surely, should have read the filings with the government.
Hey -
This "game" they are playing, if win using it, with the
tactics to change the "fair use", and with patents, any bets
that they want to take to back all of MySQL (and stop forks
of that too), to own it all again as well..?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
