Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

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

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

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:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

The jury pain. | 287 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

The jury pain.

Authored by: Tkilgore on Wednesday, May 02 2012 @ 11:56 AM EDT

If I were on that jury I think I would have trouble making sense of the
instructions. The problem:

Whatever Google copied seems to have been copied from Apache Harmony and it
seems that the Apache license has been observed in full. Further, no one seems
to have claimed in the courtroom that Apache Harmony was in out and out
violation of Sun's copyrights. Thus, if Apache Harmony was legal and Google
copied stuff from Apache Harmony in accord with the license on Apache Harmony,
then what exactly has Google done which could have violated Sun's copyrights?

But the way I read the jury instructions, they seem explicitly to forbid the
jury from even investigating whether or not the above recital is valid, as part
of the decision.

So what to make of that? What is a jury to do when it is instructed to ignore
some of the most salient facts in the case?

[ 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 )