|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 18 2012 @ 07:32 AM EDT |
Here's the list [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: OmniGeek on Wednesday, April 18 2012 @ 08:26 AM EDT |
Reading the reports, it sounds like Oracle's counsel is doing a bang-up job of
convincing the jury ... that they have neither a case nor a clue. When one party
to a suit is all over the road, swerving wildly about, and the other party has a
simple, straightforward case with good factual support, it's not too hard to
figure out who to believe. (Especially when the opposition's witnesses provide
such self-contradiction as Mr. Ellison has; his credibility as first-string
witness is now lower than SCO's share price.)
When we get to the judge's finding of fact that the content of the APIs aren't
protectable, it'll be over.
And we will get there. Let's be realistic; no judge is going to create a vast
new area of copyright protecion of the radical and disruptive sort Oracle is
pressing for, based on a case as weak as theirs. It *could* happen, because
anything *can* happen in a court, but it *won't* happen, because the judge is
clearly not a fool. All the kerfuffle in The Register and elsewhere that This
Case Could Change The Rules Of Software Development is just hot air and tabloid
scaremongering.
---
My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on
espresso.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|