I agree with a lot of what you say but I didn't understand
this:
IMHO, I would not be so quick to challenge the motives of the
judge.
You seem to imply that I was challenging the motives of the
judge but I can't see what it was in my post that led you to think that. My
intent was to talk about how it seems Oracle's lawyers are trying to game the
system. In particular I was pointing out their repeated attempts to make it
appear as if everyone thinks APIs are already protected by copyright.
If
it seemed like I was impugning the motives, or even the competence, of Judge
Alsup then I am truly sorry. I believe that as officers of the court, lawyers
need to be held to a much higher standard of conduct than politicians and
campaign managers. I feel like one of those defendants you see on tv who jumps
up and shouts "that's a lie!" and then gets charged with contempt of court. It
was frustrating to see Oracle slip in their same API mis-truth again under a
different guise. It was even more frustrating to see Judge Alsup repeat it
(perhaps even in front of the jury).
I agree with you (and I also hope
it's true) that the truth will finally out. That's why I
said:
After is all said and done (I hope) Oracle's lawyers might
have a lot of 'splainin' to do.
--- Our job is to
remind ourselves that there are more contexts than the one we’re in now — the
one that we think is reality.
-- Alan Kay [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|