|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 31 2012 @ 07:43 PM EDT |
The range check function could be an overnight homework
exercise for a tenth-grader with a month of Java experience.
To a professional coder, it contains absolutely no creative
expression whatsoever. Every engineer at Oracle is wincing
in shame to hear their company's lawyers voicing such a
preposterous argument.
It makes me wonder if it is possible for a litigator to
cross the line from "making the best possible argument" to
"intentionally trying to deceive a lay jury". It really
seems like Oracle was hoping to bamboozle a group of 12
citizens that might not know any better.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 31 2012 @ 08:47 PM EDT |
Poster of the parent here. I got my facts wrong: the jury
decided the 9 lines was infringing. Jury decided that the 8
files decompiled were de-minimus, and the judge reversed that
decision. Sorry.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|