|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 04 2012 @ 12:30 PM EDT |
Oracle-Google trial could result in partial verdict or even mistrial
ht
tp://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/oracle-google-trial-could-result-in-partial-verdict-
or-even-mistrial/76224?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 04 2012 @ 03:23 PM EDT |
<a href="http://goo.gl/PZAvH">ComputerWorld (IDG) report
with these points:</a>
<blockquote>
"Google's question called for a yes or no answer, but Mr.
Schwartz in response volunteered an opinion as to what 'we'
'felt' about the grounds for pursuing litigation against
Google over Android," its motion states.
"The question appeared to ask only whether Mr. Schwartz had
made a decision not to pursue litigation," Oracle added.
"But Mr. Schwartz's answer -- and Google's subsequent use of
that answer -- implicates Sun's (now Oracle's) privileged
discussions by suggesting that there was an unidentified
group of people ("we"), who had made some final decision as
to whether to pursue litigation and the strength of those
claims."
"What legal grounds Sun's management felt they had or what
decisions they were considering is clearly privileged,"
Oracle said. "Moreover, Mr. Schwartz had no right nor any
basis to make such a statement which subjects Oracle to
privilege waivers that Mr. Schwartz has no authority to
invoke."
Also, "the suggestion that Oracle had decided not [to] sue
is clearly against the weight of the evidence presented in
this case," Oracle said.
</blockquote>
Are these points valid? Do they have any merit at all? It
all seems pretty made-up and purposefully-avoiding-the-main-
points to me.What's your opinion? How can they be addressed?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
