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
yeah, but the FUD | 697 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
But the instructions on fair use rule out fair use
Authored by: SilverWave on Monday, May 07 2012 @ 02:58 PM EDT
Nice :-)

---
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 | # ]

Good verdict for Google
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 07 2012 @ 03:16 PM EDT
> At least this provides some reassurance that common people are not so
dumb.

Oh, now look who's jumping to conclusions...

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Good verdict for Google
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 07 2012 @ 03:20 PM EDT
Then they would have said Google's use was legally protected "fair
use." The jury couldn't agree on that point.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

yeah, but the FUD
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 07 2012 @ 03:37 PM EDT
The FUDsters are going to be out in full force for the next few days, crowing
about how the jury said Google infringed, when it hasn't even been decided yet
whether the stuff Oracle's whole copyright case was about was even
copyrightable.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Good verdict for Google
Authored by: BJ on Monday, May 07 2012 @ 04:24 PM EDT
At least this provides some reassurance that common people are not so dumb
Thank you sir!

bjd


[ 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 )