Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 25 2012 @ 09:15 PM EDT |
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: PolR on Wednesday, April 25 2012 @ 10:21 PM EDT |
What is the probability that a jury member has seen the trick? As you pointed
out, anyone submitted to this form of bullying will remember and notice it. And
there is the possibility that someone notices the trick without having been
bullied.
The conditioning effect works only when no one notices. Otherwise this kind of
stuff damages the credibility of the questioner because he openly takes the role
of the bully.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Gringo_ on Wednesday, April 25 2012 @ 11:13 PM EDT |
Shouldn't we be using more inclusive language, so nobody
feels left out?
Like...
Is that why you stopped beating your significant
other?
Nobody wants to feel left out, you insensitive
clod!
(That was supposed to be funny, in case you forgot to
laugh. I
get giddy this time of night as it approaches my
bedtime.) [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: indyandy on Thursday, April 26 2012 @ 06:56 AM EDT |
Would the witness face any sanctions for responding as follows:
(Closes eyes and holds forehead with one hand to emphasise the complexity of the
question)
Thinks out loud "Did anyone tell me something that wasn't and isn't true?
Hmmmmm"
(long pause for reflection)
"No"
This would inflict the double whammy on the questioner of loss of both
credibility and minutes.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Ian Al on Thursday, April 26 2012 @ 09:05 AM EDT |
I'm as worried about the judge as the jury. Smart as he is, courts start with
the presumption that 'of course you need a licence for someone's stuff if it's
protectable. Now we need to work out if it is legally protectable'.
They are not used to the conflation of open licence and paided licence being
used by Oracle.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|