|
|
|
| Authored by: Ed L. on Saturday, May 05 2012 @ 12:46 AM EDT |
| This isn't a bogus "SCO is successor to Santa Cruz." This is for real: Oracle
really did acquire Sun Micro Systems "lock stock and barrel". So their
wording is probably (ianal) legally correct.
Whether it fools Judge Alsup
is a different (legal) question.
:-)
---
Real Programmers mangle
their own memory. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Ian Al on Saturday, May 05 2012 @ 02:36 AM EDT |
.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: PJ on Saturday, May 05 2012 @ 10:02 AM EDT |
They don't want testimony that there was an
actual decision by the company at the highest
level to waive their right to sue.
If there were such a decision, Oracle would
be blocked from suing successfully now, in
that it inherited from Sun the good and the bad.
They don't care if the story is that Schwartz
was a wimp who didn't dare sue. "There is a new
sheriff in town," Michael Jacobs told the jury.
A stronger guy, is the implication, and that
is the story they want told.
If Sun made a bindable decision not to sue, that
is a serious problem for Oracle.
On proof reading. Keep in mind this was filed
in the wee hours after a long day in court, after
weeks of not enough sleep and under a pressing
deadline, after emergency research and strategy
sessions to figure out what to do about Mr.
Schwartz when they saw his name on the list.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
