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
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

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
No, actually I don't | 81 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
No, actually I don't
Authored by: celtic_hackr on Thursday, May 03 2012 @ 12:17 PM EDT
I'm relying on observing what has transpired all over the US and the planet in
courts over the past decade or so. The jury will find on fact issues, which will
become part of the record of this case, and *will* definitely be used by
subsequent lawsuits. Have you learned nothing at all on Groklaw?

Yes, the jury is not ruling on the law, just the facts but the facts are used to
make a ruling, which ruling becomes precedent and hence the law. So stop and
think and stop jumping to any conclusions not based on facts and history.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

You just leap to any conclusion right?
Authored by: Oliver on Thursday, May 03 2012 @ 12:18 PM EDT
The question is really how the judge phrases the judgement
not what the jury say.

I.e. the if the jury return "Fair Use" then the judgement
will probably be construed at some point in the future to
set the precedent to be that APIs are copyrightable. This
won't be the case, as almost certainly the judge will say
explicitly that this case does not set that precedent, but
it doesn't mean that it won't be used in that way.

However if the jury does return "Fair Use" then it might be
considered as a precedent that a clean room implementation
is "Fair Use" of an API irrespective of whether it can be
copyrighted. That is almost as valuable.

[ 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 )