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
Connection with reality | 225 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Connection with reality
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 10 2012 @ 11:27 AM EDT
It protects the jo- I mean it protects the invention creators.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Connection with reality
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 10 2012 @ 11:31 AM EDT
Or course its inovative... for the patent holder. Its an innovative way to try
and collect money. That seems to be the extent of how inovative software
patents are.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Connection with reality
Authored by: Gringo_ on Thursday, May 10 2012 @ 12:26 PM EDT

I enjoyed the software tutorial, especially this colourful phrase...

A method call is a line of other code somewhere else in the program that calls up (or invokes) the method and specifies the arguments to be passed to the method for crunching. The return is returned for use as the program marches on after the method call.

Now, there was nothing wrong with that description, and it seemed to me that Oracle summed it all up pretty good. However, I am certain that the jury doesn't have a hope in hell of understanding it.

I have a suggestion that would make it easier for the jury to decide if Google has infringed any of the claims, and I believe it will yield more accurate results. Simply supply the jury with a set of dice.

[ 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 )