|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 11:33 AM EDT |
Caleb Garling @CalebGarling
If there's a damages phase Oracle promises to call Larry
Page, Andy Rubin, Tim Lindholm and Eric Schmidt. Again. And
lay out Android revenue[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 11:34 AM EDT |
Caleb Garling @CalebGarling
That said, O's David Boies and G's Bruce Baber appear to be
nearing an agreement to present to the judge for damages[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 12:23 PM EDT |
Rachel King @ZDNetRachel
After 90 min of who knows what, Judge Alsup enters the room[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 12:28 PM EDT |
Ginny LaRoe @GinnyLaRoe
Proposition Boies: Sounds like the judge is signing off on
Oracle/Google's new approach for damages phase.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 12:32 PM EDT |
Ginny LaRoe @GinnyLaRoe
Oracle v Google procedural deal: This jury will not decide $$
on copyright infringement. So, this is now just a patent
jury.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 12:55 PM EDT |
BrandonBailey @BrandonBailey
By my reading of the stipulation just submitted, Oracle
Google attys agree they won't ask current jury to decide any
damages for copyright..[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 12:57 PM EDT |
BrandonBailey @BrandonBailey
Depending on how the judge rules on copyrightability of APIs,
a future jury could be asked to assess damages for all
copyright issues but..
BrandonBailey @BrandonBailey
.. but if rulings go against Oracle on the APIs, they'll just
ask the judge to assign statutory damages for the other
copyright infringement[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 01:00 PM EDT |
| This one is much less noisy. Feed by tqft9999 [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 01:06 PM EDT |
BrandonBailey ‏@BrandonBailey
Patents still in deliberation, but this means Oracle's not
getting a big jury award any time soon, tho may yet be able
to pursue in future.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 01:43 PM EDT |
Here is Rachel King's latest article about what happened in court this
morning:
http://www.zdnet.com/b
log/btl/oracle-google-hammer-out-potential-trial-roadmap/77162?utm_medium=twitte
r&utm_source=twitterfeed
She has also uploaded the stipulation
to Scribd:
http://www.scribd.com/zdnetrachel/d/93799869-Oracle-
v-Google-Stipulation-Regarding-Copyright-Damages
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 03:11 PM EDT |
Rachel King @ZDNetRachel
Time for a jury question! Everyone back to the courtroom.
just when @bcbishop thought we were going home...[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 03:12 PM EDT |
Rachel King @ZDNetRachel
All of team Oracle is already here. So are the press. Only
Bruce Baber is here for team Google. Where is everyone??[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 03:21 PM EDT |
Rachel King @ZDNetRachel
So about that jury question...where is it?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 03:29 PM EDT |
Rachel King ‏@ZDNetRachel
Judge Alsup finally back in the room. We have a jury
question.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 03:36 PM EDT |
Rachel King ‏@ZDNetRachel
Jury has ? on instructions, examining the question of what
is meant by "containing" one or more symbolic references
Rachel King @ZDNetRachel
Jury: can "containing" mean inclusion of process, i.e. the
symbolic reference resolution? or is it strictly referring
to literal contents?
I think they may have to spend some time decoding and
arguing about that...
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 03:37 PM EDT |
Rachel King ‏@ZDNetRachel
Oracle says "containing" means inclusion of process. Google
disagrees, says confined to literal contents.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 03:50 PM EDT |
Rachel King @ZDNetRachel
Judge says Google's view is best; "cant imagine any other way
to go on this;" said even Mitchell saw this. Going with
literal contents only[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 03:51 PM EDT |
Rachel King ‏@ZDNetRachel
Despite Jacobs trying one last time to convince him
otherwise, Alsup said no to ORCL. Jury coming back into
courtroom for instructions.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 03:51 PM EDT |
Rachel King ‏@ZDNetRachel
Why is there always laughter behind the jury door? Boies just
said "this patent stuff is really fun." Now laughter in
courtroom[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 03:52 PM EDT |
Rachel King ‏@ZDNetRachel
Jury actually gearing up to leave at 1PM. Judge asked if
that's still the case. ALL of them nodded. They're ready to
hit the road.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 03:54 PM EDT |
Rachel King ‏@ZDNetRachel
Suddenly a loud beeping noise. Alsup listened to his wrist &
asked if that was himself. Its off now, but we dont know what
it was.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 04:15 PM EDT |
| no text [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
