decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
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

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
fundamental problem ... | 300 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
fundamental problem ...
Authored by: LocoYokel on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 08:03 PM EDT
IIRC, Google tried and Ellison flat refused to settle on any terms that would
allow Google to remain in business at all. Something along the lines of 100% of
all income was his demand at one point I believe.

I could be mis-remembering but I don't think so.

---
Political correctness is an effort to abrogate the First
Amendment under the assumption that there exists a right to
not be offended and that it has priority

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

fundamental problem ...
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 12:12 AM EDT
> What about donating those amazing 'glasses' for the disabled to the world
Brin?
> What about giving $1B to produce and distribute them Larry?

Google is a public company. They have a duty to their shareholders to attempt to
make a reasonable profit. If they start acting like a charity, instead, their
shareholders have the right to kick the current management out out and install
somebody with a stronger emphasis on the bottom line.

Google is no longer solely the property of Brin & Ellison. They can't just
hand out other peoples' money as if it were their own.

Not that I don't sympathise, but you would probably be ticked off if somebody
decided to donate part of your pay packet to charity without asking you. It's
the same principle, in its own way as evil as destroying the technology would
be.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

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 )