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
So, infringers losses? | 400 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
So, infringers losses?
Authored by: JK Finn on Saturday, May 12 2012 @ 09:53 AM EDT
If rangeCheck costs Google money and the test files don't
earn money, aren't the resulting "profits" negative?

I suppose Google could concede a portion of those to
Oracle...

JK Finn

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Good point
Authored by: PJ on Saturday, May 12 2012 @ 11:50 AM EDT
The problem, in my view, is that judges
can be a bit intimidated by famous lawyers,
and they can enjoy a show. But the real
problem is the judge still seems to think
that Boies Schiller is a normal law firm
as to what it will and won't do. His surprise
that they would ask for millions in infringer's
profits, for example, tells me that he truly
doesn't get it at all, how they roll. He
thought there was no financial significance
to his ruling on the test files. And he
thought it didn't matter is he let them go
for infringer's profits. What he has done,
however, is give Oracle a chance to string this
along for years and years, while the infringer's
profits issue works its way to the US Supreme
Court, in Boies Schiller's dreams, if they
don't get the money and a big payday if they
do.

It's a law firm born for Ellison, who also
doesn't care, I gather, if the whole world
hates him and his company.

[ 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 )