|
Authored by: darrellb on Wednesday, April 25 2012 @ 05:26 PM EDT |
Google argues that since the copyright registration is for a collection, Oracle
can't assert infringement claims except as to the collection as a whole.
Therefore they can't sue over parts of the collection which is, of course, what
the 37 APIs are.
Oracle has argued that Google can infringe less than the full copyrighted matter
in the same manner that one can infringe a novel by copying less than the
complete novel.
The Rule 50 motion and reply should be interesting.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- whoops - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 25 2012 @ 05:43 PM EDT
- whoops - Authored by: jjs on Thursday, April 26 2012 @ 06:20 AM EDT
|
Authored by: Ian Al on Thursday, April 26 2012 @ 07:49 AM EDT |
The work is the registered Java SE. The entire Java SE API Specification is not
a registered work.
In fact, I argue later that it is not a work at all and that the SSO is not
protectable in a library of copyright documents.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|