|
| Authored by: darrellb on Monday, May 14 2012 @ 05:34 PM EDT |
Courts can't give unlimited wiggle room because it exceeds their discretion.
Courts can only allow so much wiggle room as the law allows. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: PJ on Monday, May 14 2012 @ 06:12 PM EDT |
Well, litigators will keep going forever, you
know. It's what they love. There has to be
a cutoff at some point.
Any cutoff designed by people to be used as a
general rule invariable harms edge cases, but
you still need one.
This was Google's burden to address, and in
the sleep-deprived atmosphere with the
fast-changing junk that
BS&F keeps throwing at them, they may have
dropped a stitch. But the truth is, this
is this judge's view. It ain't over 'til it's
over, and the appeals court may not agree.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Monday, May 14 2012 @ 06:41 PM EDT |
requires a legal team with a flimsy case.
---
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 15 2012 @ 01:01 AM EDT |
| Oracle didn't get a redo on objecting to Schmidt's testimony. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
