|
Authored by: mtew on Monday, April 30 2012 @ 10:34 PM EDT |
All good points, but those are for the judge to decide. The jury has much less
latitude and much less to consider.
The jury might decide that the copying was De Minimis if Oracle had filtered the
material properly, but they (or more probably BS&F) did a tSCOg and went for
the whole ball of wax. That left the jury with the wrong question to answer.
The proper answer to the De Minimis question given the data presented is that
Google copied a significant amount of the API.
If the information had been properly filtered, and they had been asked only
about the questionable and improper copying, the answer would have been much
less clear. Google did a decent but not perfect job of that from what little I
know.
But if Oracle et al had done a proper job, the suit would never have been
filled.
---
MTEW[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|