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
Thank you! | 396 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Thank you!
Authored by: jbb on Tuesday, April 24 2012 @ 11:03 PM EDT
And thank you for all the wonderful reporting. I know it must be a great deal of work. I hope you see how valuable it is to the rest of us. If you feel like indulging me a little further, perhaps you can allay my fears. When the judge asked Schmidt:
how he can reconcile needing a clean room but not needing a license
doesn't this imply that you usually need a license to do a clean room implementation? Earlier in the day (or maybe on the previous day) before the jury came in, Oracle had some document or something (maybe just words?) and said that you need a license to do a clean room implementation. The understanding in the industry is that this is simply not true. It's the equivalent of saying that APIs can be copyrighted. From what was reported on The Verge, it seemed like the judge believed Oracle on this point but he might not have understood that it is the equivalent of saying APIs can be protected by copyright. ISTM that Oracle led the judge off into never-never land.

It seems like you have a vastly different interpretation of what happened. The central issue in this case is whether APIs can be copyrighted or not. The way I see it (perhaps worst case scenario) is that the judge just told the jury that of course APIs can be copyrighted. This is because the only license you would need to do a clean room implementation is a license for the APIs. I'm worried that the camel's nose has crept back into the tent.

Even if you don't feel like responding to this post, I'm deeply grateful for your previous response. Your feelings and impressions are often so much more informative than a transcript of what was said. A lot of important information gets tossed away when we reduce human interactions to just the words that were said. Again, I thank you.

---
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 | # ]

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 )