Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 07 2012 @ 03:56 PM EDT |
I agree, what I meant by reasonable conclusion was just as
the questions were asked, not by the evidence submitted. I
was unclear. I would have actually answered yes to both
based on what I have read here.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: calris74 on Monday, May 07 2012 @ 10:52 PM EDT |
NO Google in fact did not rely on that "in
deciding to use
the
structure, sequence, and organization of the copyrighted
compilable code
without obtaining a license"
Google did not convince the jury that
they relied on Sun's
behaviour as a basis for their decision not to pursue a
license.
I doubt they'll make the same mistake at the
retrial
Which makes this an even bigger loss for Oracle[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Correction - Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, May 08 2012 @ 12:41 AM EDT
|
Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Tuesday, May 08 2012 @ 01:09 AM EDT |
Isn't Question 4 an advisory opinion?
---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.
"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|