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
Oracle Return On Investment | 697 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Oracle Return On Investment
Authored by: MDT on Monday, May 07 2012 @ 06:04 PM EDT
Oracle's getting a great return on investment for this trial, they don't need to
win to reap profits.

From this point forward, any sucker they approach for licensing fees is going to
have a very clear example of just how expensive it is to avoid even the most
spurious licensing request.

No matter how baseless Oracle's demand for licensing is going forward, they will
be able to point to this litigation and extort major $$$. Because even though
their demand is baseless, paying it is cheaper than going to court to defend
against it.

Until we start making trolls pay for both sides of the court cases, this type of
corporate extortion will only continue, and BSF will continue to exemplify the
type of ethics required to make it in the modern corporate litigation field.

Kind of makes me understand a friend of mine who refuses to let lawyers into his
house at all. He ran into a few BSF types early in his life.

---
MDT

[ 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 )