|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 03 2012 @ 04:51 PM EDT |
Actually, unless you can show that purchasers bought smartphones only because
Android was the OS, you can't attribute ANY profit from advertising to Android.
If Android didn't exist, then some (presumably large) percentage of buyers would
have bought alternative smartphones.
Presumably they would have visited the same websites with their non-Android
purchases as they actually did with their Android phones. Thus there was no
increase in advertising revenue.
The only way to argue otherwise, is to posit that Android so expanded the number
of smartphones, that it materially enlarged the marketing space targeted to
smartphone users.
At which point the plaintiffs will have proved the defendant's defense of public
benefit via fair use.
But then what do I know,
I am sooo not a lawyer
JG[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|