Authored by: SilverWave on Monday, May 07 2012 @ 02:53 PM EDT |
Google always wanted specificity
Oracle not so much.
---
RMS: The 4 Freedoms
0 run the program for any purpose
1 study the source code and change it
2 make copies and distribute them
3 publish modified versions
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: SilverWave on Monday, May 07 2012 @ 02:56 PM EDT |
Caleb Garling ‏ @CalebGarling
Google argues you can't have a partial answer on question one
---
RMS: The 4 Freedoms
0 run the program for any purpose
1 study the source code and change it
2 make copies and distribute them
3 publish modified versions
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 07 2012 @ 02:57 PM EDT |
That pretty much summarises my reading.
The copyright bit of the case was always headed to the Supremes the only
question was the precise route.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- I'm Confused - Authored by: xtifr on Monday, May 07 2012 @ 05:23 PM EDT
- I'm Confused - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 07 2012 @ 05:44 PM EDT
- I'm Confused - Authored by: Ed L. on Monday, May 07 2012 @ 11:52 PM EDT
- I'm Confused - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 08 2012 @ 12:43 PM EDT
|
Authored by: eric76 on Monday, May 07 2012 @ 03:27 PM EDT |
It sounds like Google is pushing for a mistrial, but if the Judge
finds for Google on SSO, then all questions are answered and off we go for an
appeal. Only needing a retrial if the Judge is overturned on
appeal.
Why wait for the SSO? If it goes against Google, then
wouldn't a motion for a mistrial be "untimely"?
Since the SSO
issue is so controversial might the judge adopt the reasoning of the EU court
and kick it upstairs for a legal decision?
I think that he does
that by making a decision and letting it be appealed to a higher court.
On
the other hand, if he doesn't make a decision that the API is not copyrightable,
than I suspect that it could be pretty much the same as deciding that the API
was copyrighted and leave Google in a big mess which they will appeal.
If he
were to decide that APIs were copyrightable, wouldn't other interested parties
be entitled to submit briefs? Have any other interested parties been submitting
briefs on that issue? [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- I'm Confused - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 07 2012 @ 03:44 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 07 2012 @ 08:43 PM EDT |
If the judge rules APIs are not copyrightable and moots 1B then they'll most
likely drop it. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 08 2012 @ 05:42 AM EDT |
"Since the SSO issue is so controversial"
No it's not, everyone in the world other than Oracle (and some of their
employees/hired PR mouthpieces) agree it's a load of bovine dung. It's like
saying that the existance of the world tomorrow is controvercial because there's
some crazy homeless guy standing on a New York street with a sign saying that
the world will end tomorrow.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|