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
Material company information | 287 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Material company information
Authored by: s65_sean on Tuesday, May 01 2012 @ 06:05 PM EDT
I'm not saying that the particular blog post in question was or wasn't an
official company statement. I personally think that McNealy was lying, but
that's just my opinion. I'm just saying that the fact that Schwartz later added
the disclaimers to his blog posts after some date gives some validity to
Oracle's argument that the particular post was not an official company
statement.

PJ seems to take that statement in the annual report, which was created more
than 6 months after the blog post in question, to be the absolute status of the
blog at the time that the post was made, and I was merely offering a possible
reason why Oracle could argue that it wasn't. After all, they did produce one
more quarterly report after the blog in question, and before the annual report
was produced, where they did not make any mention of the CEO's blog.

I'm just saying that maybe PJ is making more out of this than she should.

[ 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 )