|
Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, May 08 2012 @ 07:53 AM EDT |
You guys are so funny. A better idea of
the status? Hahahaha.
Here's Rachel
King, a relevant sampling:
@FOSSpatents Ha, yes, @GinnyLaRoe just
corrected me in the press room. Either way, we'll all have to get our wardrobes
ready.
@CalebGarling @GinnyLaRoe by the time the inevitable appeal at the
9th Circuit rolls around, we can get a #OraclevGoogle sartorial blog
up...
@GinnyLaRoe Confirmed: Safra Catz is wearing St. John today. We
might get another @Chanel sighting later this week.
During recess, I tried
to get a better look at the gold buttons on Safra Catz's jacket, but they told
me nothing about what brand it is....
Google is calling up a lot of lawyers
that have been warming the bench. In other news Safra Catz has a fitted black
blazer with gold buttons....
OK, the term "sideshow" just got added to the
#OraclevGoogle drinking game. This is ridiculous already....
It's official
and now undisputed: Michelle Obama is the best dressed first lady on the planet.
...
For the *real* news item of the day: #Googacle Style Award goes not to
councel but to reporter @ZDNetRachel.
http://pic.twitter.com/hP3kjEvr...
@GinnyLaRoe The closest I'll prob ever get
to being a red carpet reporter would be asking Safra Catz: Who are you wearing??
...
@GinnyLaRoe Looking at Safra Catz's jacket again, that's definitely got
to be @Chanel....
@GinnyLaRoe & I should have started a sartorial blog
for #OraclevGoogle. Well, perhaps there will be a retrial and we'll get another
chance....
I have to say that I do like Safra's bright red fuzzy blazer. I
wonder if that's some kind of subliminal Oracle branding.
Etc.
Now, if she got all the news in too, that'd be fine. But she didn't. If what
you are interested in is the flavor of the day, fine. Not a problem. But that's
not
journalism, which is why it was to me a little silly. Get the news. Who,
what, when, where, why. After that, then who wore what if it interests you.
But here's her coverage of the jury verdict, and notice this
part:
The decision came after the jury almost delivered a partial
verdict on Friday afternoon last week. They were unable to agree unanimously on
one of the four questions in the jury instructions.
At issue in this phase
of the trial was whether 37 Java APIs (Application Programming Interfaces) were
subject to copyright. Oracle argued that Google copied the APIs from the Java
core libraries, which would render 11,000 printed pages on the specifications,
into the Android core libraries.
Oracle’s lawyers compared the creation of
APIs to writing a piece of music, going further to say that API’s are not just
“ideas,” but creative works that requires significant expertise and
time.
Google argued that there was no copyright infringement because Google
didn’t copy any unauthorized Java code, and that the Internet giant made fair
use of the Java language APIs in Android and that Sun publicly approved
Android’s use of Java. This part of the trial was NOT about
whether APIs are copyrightable. That is an issue of law, not fact, and that is
why only the judge can rule on that.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|