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

Case is irrelevant; going for FUD fuel | 194 comments | Create New Account

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

Case is irrelevant; going for FUD fuel

Authored by: nuthead on Friday, May 11 2012 @ 01:43 PM EDT

I think statutory damages run from $700 to $150,000. I could
be wrong though.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

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

It may be a lottery ticket decision. They go for the small chance of winning the
big amount. Statutory damages is chump changes compared to the legal costs so
far so this option may be foregone without adding much to the legal bill. They
seem to have decided the lottery ticket is the better option.

This probably means we are going to have a damage phase for this trial after
all. The parties aren't going to streamline the case if Oracle sticks to the
lottery ticket because there is no way Google will fold on this.

[ 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 )