Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

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

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

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:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

Alsup doesn't think Oracle can pull that off. Van Nest agrees... | 194 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

Alsup doesn't think Oracle can pull that off. Van Nest agrees...

Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 11 2012 @ 12:42 PM EDT

Rachel King ‏ @ZDNetRachel
Alsup said he'd be surprised if Oracle pulls that off. Van
Nest chimes in: I don't think you'll be a bit surprised, your
honor.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

I don't understand... - Authored by: Gringo_ on Friday, May 11 2012 @ 03:36 PM EDT
- I don't understand... - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 11 2012 @ 04:09 PM EDT
  - I don't understand... - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 11 2012 @ 04:36 PM EDT
    - He's saying that Oracle is playing with one die short of a pair :) [N/T] - Authored by: bugstomper on Friday, May 11 2012 @ 06:07 PM EDT

Case is irrelevant; going for FUD fuel

Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 11 2012 @ 01:05 PM EDT

Just a thought - perhaps the statutory damages are so low that they are the same
as not getting anything. Therefore, go for the big bucks - even if they're
imaginary - not only for FUD mileage, but to keep the big-number dream going for
the appeal.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Case is irrelevant; going for FUD fuel - Authored by: nuthead on Friday, May 11 2012 @ 01:43 PM EDT
- Case is irrelevant; going for FUD fuel - Authored by: PJ on Friday, May 11 2012 @ 03:08 PM EDT
  - Case is irrelevant; going for FUD fuel - Authored by: DannyB on Friday, May 11 2012 @ 03:44 PM EDT
- Case is irrelevant; going for FUD fuel - Authored by: dio gratia on Friday, May 11 2012 @ 05:18 PM EDT
Case is irrelevant; going for FUD fuel - Authored by: PolR on Friday, May 11 2012 @ 01:56 PM EDT

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 )