|
Authored by: hAckz0r on Tuesday, August 21 2012 @ 10:31 AM EDT |
In the other hand you gave a gift to the same organization, not the reverse.
Your professional time is worth something, and if you volunteered then you gave
a gift of your time * your normal compensation rate. How exactly do your see
that as you being paid to you? If Google's money did not pay you directly for
your personal expenses (e.g. air fare, hotel stay, food that only mentors not
coders received, etc) then you should have little to worry about. Having the
privilege to donate your time and talent has many personal rewards, but those
rewards can not even be quantified or enumerated, as they exist only within you.
Kudos for your help as a mentor! There, I just paid you too! Fortunately I
am not a party to the current litigation so you can enjoy that statement made in
public and blog about it all you want. ;)
--- The Investors IP Law:
The future health of a Corporation is measured as the inverse of the number of
IP lawsuits they are currently litigating. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 21 2012 @ 10:32 AM EDT |
Your latter paragraph is, perhaps, easier to answer. We saw in SCO how
blogs
and articles got into evidence and appeals, so Judge Alsup is asking the
parties to put a
big mark on the items out there that might have been
influenced by their
largesse, even innocently or indirectly, without insisting
on the impossible.
As to your first key question, I'd
say that if your
comments, like mine, were found in talk backs and replies, i.e.,
not in the
main article, no worries. I am a java programmer and so I use
resources
provided to me for free by Oracle. I use Google for my searches. (Well,
now
that by extension, Google suggests I infringe the patents they bought from
Motorola because my Macs have wi-fi, maybe I should rethink that.) So, prior to
yesterday, I have reason for both companies to do well. But I don't write any
thing with a by-line, so I consider the odds to be very close to zero that my
words have influenced the world. Shoot, I look at the replies and I don't think
I
convince any one. If you weren't commenting on the trial via a blog and url
that
you control, I think the way Google has benefited you (and us) via the
Summer of
Code doesn't rise to the level of what the Judge requested. That
said, an email to
Google identifying yourself and posting ids wouldn't hurt: it
may mean that
Google shows good faith and openness because people like you
volunteer what
would otherwise be a difficult connection to establish. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, August 21 2012 @ 11:42 AM EDT |
The judge doesn't care about your comments
here. He seems to be looking for some equivalent
to Florian Mueller and also for any lawyers
who may have written scholarly articles that
the court might have been influenced by.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 21 2012 @ 04:02 PM EDT |
Somewhere in the Deed of Gift* when Google gave the money
to your organisation there should be a paragraph or two dissociating
Google from anything you or your organisation might say or do
at some future time.
* I'm certain there will be a document of that form somewhere,
Google likes to stay onside with IRS, SEC, &c. They're not like
we suspect certain other parties who'll just slip a wad of notes
out of an inside pocket.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|