Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 08 2012 @ 08:52 AM EDT |
This part of the trial was NOT about whether APIs are
copyrightable. That is an issue of law, not fact, and that is why only the judge
can rule on that.
While I'm not interested in what she tweets
about, she is correct on this point. It is true that the judge rather than the
jury will make the decision, but that doesn't change what the first phase of the
trial was about.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: ansak on Tuesday, May 08 2012 @ 09:20 AM EDT |
Who cares what, er, who people are wearing! It's the ideas that matter.
Somebody read out ZDNet's headline just after lunch yesterday and I didn't know
what their source was until I got back to my desk. Rachel King is guilty of
really misunderstanding the issue if she thought Google's lawyers were all so
jovial because asking for a mistrial was their last, best hope.
But ZDNet
was after the screaming headline yesterday and they did get to press first with
their "Dewey Wins!" message. Maybe they have some long positions in Oracle that
they'd like to shed profitably? But that's not even hearsay.
cheers...ank [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 08 2012 @ 02:09 PM EDT |
It gives us a view into how others perceive what is happening. The jury has
people on it who don't have the same prospective as the readers of this site and
the insights and comments of some of the observers could be an indication of how
the jury perceive the case. We all use our own filters and colored glasses,
sometimes it's fun to try on someone else's. :)[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- funny glasses - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 08 2012 @ 04:43 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 08 2012 @ 05:45 PM EDT |
Also, she (or someone on her twitter feed) seems to think that an appeal
will go to the 9th Circuit rather than the Federal Circuit. Things people
covering
the law should know, no? [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|