decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
The main point | 360 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
The main point
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 09 2012 @ 10:32 AM EDT
The main point that Oracle is trying to show by using the "Hello
World" speed test is that they are claiming that "removing the
patented technology from Android" causes it to run slower.

Google's main defense is that ANDROID DOES NOT PRACTICE THE PATENTED TECHNOLOGY
in the first place, so how could Oracle have removed it?

This is not evidence of infringement. It is evidence that removing something
from Android makes it slower. So what? Is that something that they removed the
incarnation of the patented technology? They haven't proven that yet.

I would think that Google should have filed a motion that this evidence be
stricken from the patent liability phase and could only be used in the damages
phase if Oracle proved infringement in the patent liability phase.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

They did not say they had to
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 09 2012 @ 11:55 AM EDT
..they chose to for compatibility with Java programmer head space.

And as you rightly point out, Android and Java are not the same thing.

I'd like to see a definition of "removed" to know what was actually
done to demonstrate that removal of the patented technology produces a ~10% slow
down.

Otherwise HelloWorld is merely a frivolous test with no boundaries for sensible
comparison.

if it was done on an Android emulator, you've basically just introduced another
layer of interference that will likely have at least a +/-10% slow down for any
operation

If it was done on an Android device, how is it that Oracle are complaining that
Android is not compatible?

If it was Java on a PC, and android on a Device

well that's not exactly measuring the same thing.

Were all other system services shutdown so as not to interfere with the test?

What does 10% mean? If load time is 50ms, then a 10% difference maybe no more
than margin of error in reliable tick count.

Did the "removal" accidentally cripple something else and cause an
'indirect' slow down?

Before suggesting people are "ridiculing things they don't
understand", you should consider that there are many here do have a very
good understanding and that your own view is likely limited and blinkered.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )