|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 24 2012 @ 04:07 AM EDT |
The problem is that although the judge denied Googles motion on the (c)
registration it's possible Oracle has no legal basis for a damages claim.
They registered a (c) on the collective work, and the dog ate their homework
(blank disk) - so what does he award damages on ?.
He can't award for more than for the one registered collective work at BEST,
there simply aren't multiple (c) items here registered.
It's similar to the (c) protection on a phone book, the individual names and
addresses aren't protected, just the work as a totality.
The really bad news for Oracle there's no way to prove that the components in
dispute even existed in the (c) item and they aren't covered by the (c) of the
collective work - you have to have registered the (c) to be able to collect
damages.
Google has already removed the offending code, all they had to do for a
non-registered violation.
Google would likely win on appeal just on the registration issue WRT damages and
possibly even on the raw 'violation', as they at least raised the matter during
*this* trial they can use it on appeal, it's not a finding of facts, but of
law.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
