|
|
|
| Authored by: DannyB on Tuesday, May 15 2012 @ 04:58 PM EDT |
Ninety six percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name.
---
The price of freedom is eternal litigation.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 15 2012 @ 10:18 PM EDT |
It's not really Jacobs' fault that Oracle's case was so weak. They didn't
register the proper copyrights, they made novel and probably unsupportable
arguments about the SSO, they picked the wrong patents to push forward with.
Several of their patents got invalidated on reexamination, and the '104 patent
which is worthless because it doesn't even cover a Java VM, although Oracle did
not learn this until this past weekend.
Jacobs had no choice but to play the hand he was dealt, and it turned out to be
extraordinarily weak.
(And for all we know, maybe he won with it? The jury hasn't returned their
verdict yet. There's a scary thought!)[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: sproggit on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 03:40 AM EDT |
When Mr Boies represented the Department of Justice against Microsoft, I thought
his abilities to wrestle the truth from hostile witnesses was awesome.
When Mr Jacobs defended Novell against SCO, I thought his ability to cut away
the lies and trickery and deception was equally awesome.
Now we find ourselves in a case where two lawyers I have previously respected
highly are representing a side I believe to be in the wrong (morally and
legally) and yet he they are still representing that paty.
I's an imperfect world.
It might not be a pleasant thought or even a good analogy, but we might like to
consider this as being a bit like the "Wild West", in which hired guns
would often duel whilst in the pay of a wealthy land-owner. In many cases those
hired guns would also collect the bounty of criminals and could be deputised by
a Sherriff.
It certainly wasn't pretty, and in some cases I'm sure it led to injustice. But
it was the law of the day.
Perhaps what has happened is that those hired guns have had their revolvers
replaced with law books and have been put in suits. Mr Jascobs is doubtless
being directed in his approach by a strategy set by BSF.
What is more disconcerting to me is that Mr Jacobs runs the risk of tarnishing
*his* reputation, whilst others, such as Mr Boies, may walk away from this with
theirs unsullied. Which rather takes us back to the hired gun analogy.
It's not a very pleasant system when it's misused - but then that's a truism.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
