decoration decoration

When you want to know more...
For layout only
Site Map
About Groklaw
Legal Research
ApplevSamsung p.2
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Gordon v MS
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
MS Litigations
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
OOXML Appeals
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v Novell
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

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

Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal

User Functions



Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

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

No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Three things I know about Oracle v. Google | 380 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Three things I know about Oracle v. Google
Authored by: complex_number on Thursday, May 24 2012 @ 11:15 AM EDT
I can only assume that this 'lawyer' is angling for the office next to David
Boise in the near future.
He has bought the Oracle Corporate line, hook and sinker.

Ubuntu & 'apt-get' are not the answer to Life, The Universe & Everything which
is of course, "42" or is it 1.618?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Three things I know about Oracle v. Google
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 24 2012 @ 12:00 PM EDT
[F]undamentally it seems reasonable for the owner of Java to expect to profit when others profit from Java.
Realistically, the foregoing statement is bunk. If I make tractors, I don't expect a cut from the sale of every farmer's crop. If every user of Java had to pay a tithe to Oracle, nobody would touch it with a stick. And if they persist at this insanity, Java will die a deserved death.
After all, if all the Android technology was so easily derived from open source code, why did Google need to hire a load of Sun engineers who worked on Java?
More likely the Sun engineers looked at Oracle and said: "I don't want to work for the likes of them." and simply went to a company who shared their own values, visions, and goals.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Three things I [don't] know about Oracle v. Google
Authored by: artp on Thursday, May 24 2012 @ 01:25 PM EDT
It's embarrassing when someone airs their ignorance like
this. Not to mention their built-in biases.

Referring to the article's numbering system:

1. The conclusion came before the data.

2. SCO v. IBM

3. Inventors rarely profit from their inventions.

He picks one piece of testimony - out of context - and
decides that there MUST be something that Google is guilty
of. But we've seen that before, haven't we? With Microsoft
lurking int he background. So, now he can accuse me of being
a conspiracy theorist. Well, it isn't paranoia if they are
really out to get you.

I won't comment on 2 further than to be surprised that he
didn't advocate ditching the entire legal system in favor of
Boies' genius.

Finally, when I started out as an engineer, the reward for a
patent was $50 and a plaque. People kept the plaque as a
joke. Spare me the melodrama about how inventions wouldn't
happen without patents. Engineers invent because that is who
we are. Just try and stop us! Patents just ensure that the
little guy can't compete against the patent trolls.

This guy should stick to corporate law instead of journalism
or attempted technical endeavors.

Userfriendly on WGA server outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

  • Patent's purpose - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 25 2012 @ 03:23 AM EDT
The three things
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 24 2012 @ 09:46 PM EDT
1. Oracle was wronged. Well Google did use some disassembled code and the 9
lines. I doubt that Google would have much issue with righting this wrong.

2. Boise is great. Well PJ might agree.

3. Inventions are good. Yup.

Just about all of the rest is hog wash. I just wonder how much of this the
writer actually beleives himself and how much he is doing this in the hope of
making a buck.

[ 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 )