|
Authored by: drllama on Thursday, May 31 2012 @ 08:03 PM EDT |
I think that's my favorite part of the ruling. He spells out, very carefully,
including a short course on Java syntax why he's ruled the way he
ruled.
I was talking to my wife about it just now, she's not a geek, not a
programmer, but the Court's analogy to the SSO of a shelf of self-help
books resonated strongly with her. We even got to the distinction
between a compatible API and a similar but incompatible API when she
commented that someone could decide to put the books in a different
order.
I haven't read the whole decision (yet), but the more I read, the more I
think Judge Alsop wrote this, knowing the appeals court that would
review it, and has given them the most bullet proof argument possible.
I can't imagine how this could be overturned.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 09:10 AM EDT |
..."How DARE you clearly outline the issues both in Law and
in CODE! It's a violation of our right to obfuscate!" <evil
grin>[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|