|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 17 2012 @ 04:13 PM EDT |
While the judge has expressed substantial skepticism over Oracle's
claims to a large monetary award, Google would, like any corporation on the
defense, be looking for a cheap way out of the courtroom. A settlement would
foreclose an appeal and staunch the flow of red ink tied to legal
bills.
Why on earth would Google want to settle? That's wishful
thinking on the author's part. The point of no return was passed long ago, and
Google probably now wants to make this as painful and expensive (and
embarassing) for Oracle as they possibly can. You don't settle with aggressors,
especially when they were clearly in the wrong and have such a weak case.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: dio gratia on Thursday, May 17 2012 @ 04:14 PM EDT |
I found the accuracy questionable "It also found that Google stole nine
lines of code from the rangeCheck function and some decompiled test files, but
cleared the tech giant of Oracle's other allegations", but that's only my
opinion. (I refer you to Thomas Jefferson on whether an expression of an idea
can be stolen. Oracle is not missing any code.)
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
