|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 22 2012 @ 05:26 PM EDT |
Unfortunately for Oracle, they don't seem to know when to *shut up*. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 22 2012 @ 09:14 PM EDT |
I wonder how much stipulations are worth? I thought that Oracle also stipulated
to a claw-back agreement and we saw how THAT went down with the Lindholm
thing.
Then again, Google has a better record of living up to their agreements so who
knows.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 22 2012 @ 11:20 PM EDT |
IIRC the stipulation says that in any retrial, parties
can't
present any evidence that they wouldn't have been able to
during this
case.
It seems to me that publicly available documents that were
available at the time of the original trial, but not used might fall into a gray
area of interpretation. I say that since the documents were available, so the
parties should have been "able" to present them should they wish. Of course, I
have no idea what was meant by the word "able".[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|