|
|
|
| Authored by: darlmclied on Sunday, May 13 2012 @ 06:50 PM EDT |
So he is inviting Google to appeal?
Still don't get why he does that by suggesting that the jury
is not reasonable. That seems like an invite to either party
to appeal.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 13 2012 @ 07:01 PM EDT |
"Each file was copied in total" .... sure, but what was the nature of
the files, and to where were they copied, and what proportion of the copyrighted
source did they represent? The answer to those questions affects the judgment.
You can't arrive at the verdict mechanically or there would be no point in
having a jury.
The files were test files, and hence they were 100% functional, no other value
in them. Can something that is purely functional even be copyrighted? Not
according to the Copyright Act, AFAIK. Add to that the fact they were never
actually copied to the distributed Android (but only to some development
systems), and also add the fact that these whole files represented only a tiny
proportion of the overall copyrighted code, and it's easy to see how a jury
might decide that the copying was effectively not significant and hence de
minimis.
So sure, entire files were actually copied somewhere and for some purpose, but
that copying wasn't judged to be to a significant target nor for a relevant
purpose. Juries have more flexibility in arriving at a verdict than a judge
ruling on a matter of law.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: whoever57 on Sunday, May 13 2012 @ 08:36 PM EDT |
Each file was copied in total. Nothing de minimis about
it.
Let's say I copy 5 sentences from a 1,000 sentence article.
Using the logic of this court, the copyright owner could argue that each
sentence was copied in whole and thus my copying of 5 out of 1000 was not de
minimus.
What if I argued that I took all of Oracle's copyrighted
source and copied it into one file, then selected from that one file some of the
lines and used those in the test files? The fact that the files were copied
whole is irrelevant because the separation into files is
arbitrary.
All I can say is that I hope Google's lawyers can find a
way to let the jury know that the judge doesn't think they are reasonable!
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
