Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

Perhaps Stanford should be concerned | 294 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

Perhaps Stanford should be concerned

Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 30 2012 @ 09:02 PM EDT

The bigger fear would be that Ellison withholds some donations to Stanford,
since it didn't turn out to be such a good investment :^)

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Are you kidding?

Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 30 2012 @ 09:23 PM EDT

They should double, maybe triple what they paid him.

Almost certainly at Oracle's behest, he completely
repudiated his own report in a hail mary attempt to get the
jury to believe "facts" that EVEN HE did not believe when he
submitted his report. He did this purely to try and help
Oracle win.

As a result, he's seriously damaged if not destroyed his
career as an expert witness. He's also severely damaged his
professional credibility.

This is the epitome of taking one for the team. And given
the almost certain impact to his future earnings, it would
be the height of ingratitude for Oracle not to kick him a
little more for his trouble.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Are you kidding? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 31 2012 @ 04:48 AM EDT
Are you kidding? - Authored by: PJ on Thursday, May 31 2012 @ 09:42 AM EDT
- Decorum? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 31 2012 @ 11:43 AM EDT
- Are you kidding? - Authored by: ThrPilgrim on Thursday, May 31 2012 @ 12:16 PM EDT
- Are you kidding? - Authored by: Patrick Corrigan on Thursday, May 31 2012 @ 02:45 PM EDT

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )