|
|
|
| Authored by: Ian Al on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 11:32 AM EDT |
My guess is that each test file would be an infringement in terms of statutory
damages and would be a minimum of $200 a file.
However, my
assumption is that the test files are not supplied by Oracle as part of the Java
platform. I think they are part of the separately available TCK test suite which
was specifically withheld from Harmony/Google because they wanted to use Java
with mobile devices. As such, they are not included in the
complaint:
39. Google’s Android infringes Oracle America’s
copyrights in the Java platform, and Google infringes Oracle’s exclusive rights
under copyright by reproducing and distributing Android and inducing others to
reproduce and distribute Android or the code contained within
it.
The judge said nothing in the order about the facts
surrounding the eight files other than the note. Contrast that with the volumes
about the eight lines. I would have thought he would have said something about
the accidental and inadvertent nature of the copying of the test files and their
early removal in order to justify the minimum damages under the act.
I
think he has pulled a fast one over Oracle in reversing the jury decision after
the Rule 50 motion. He decided that the test files were specifically excluded by
the wording of the complaint and must be excluded from the case that Oracle
brought before the court. If Oracle have not worded the complaint correctly,
then the court can disregard this part of the infringement.
Or not and,
as you say, it's $1800. Or three hour's worth of 'expert' Cockburn
reporting.---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid! [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
