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
Oracle caught in another lie? | 237 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Oracle caught in another lie?
Authored by: darrellb on Saturday, April 21 2012 @ 07:00 AM EDT
This is not a lie. Oracle believes that the law allows Oracle broad control over
use of the specification. Google is in court because Oracle is attempting to
exert control in ways that Google believes are not allowed under the law.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Oracle caught in another lie?
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 21 2012 @ 04:36 PM EDT
Maybe you can write applications without a license,
it's just you can't distribute them.

Bit like the GPL, you can write (modify) that code,
but must observe the license to distribute.

See, this case is about the world and his dog using (illegal)
modified (stolen) Java code aka Android. If Google had kept
Android-like code in-house using it only on their backend
systems this case might never have seen the light of day.

[ 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 )