Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

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

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

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:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

I think I understand the OP... kinda... | 456 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

I think I understand the OP... kinda...

Authored by: PolR on Friday, November 30 2012 @ 10:46 AM EST

This article has a section called "Summary of the Argument". No need
to wait for part 3 to get the short version.

But the short version doesn't have the details of the test. You will find that
in the last section, just before the conclusion.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

I think I understand the OP... kinda... - Authored by: celtic_hackr on Friday, November 30 2012 @ 12:09 PM EST

I think I understand the OP... kinda...

Authored by: Wol on Friday, November 30 2012 @ 10:51 AM EST

You don't file it as a court document - you file the synopsis and attach it as
an exhibit.

I can understand the court not liking overlength legal documents, but they can't
expect you to file, for example, a detailed explanation of relativity for a
layman in say just ten pages.

Page lengths make sense for legalese, not for supporting documents (especially
if it's not the lawyer that wrote it and it wasn't written for the case!)

Cheers,
Wol

[ 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 )