|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 12 2012 @ 07:52 AM EDT |
I was about to say something along these lines myself. This judge makes comments
along the way that seem to indicate he sees through the Oracle shenanigans.
However, no matter how tough he talks, on almost every major issue he has given
way and favoured Oracle. I think the rot started in with Lindholm email where he
almost coaxed the privileged document forth from Oracle's counsel. The three
permitted attempts at a damages report from Cockburn have been a farce. Now we
have him overriding the jury on a clear decision they made. Not to overlook his
confusing and biased instructions to the jury to assume copyright applicability
to the SSO of the API signatures.
I find this judge to be inconsistent. He appears to understand things when they
are explained but it isn't retained, and in many instances he has forgotten what
he said days earlier and has to be reminded. His decisions have a haphazard
quality to them. It is almost as if he gives a little to each side (mainly
Oracle) to be seen to be even-handed regardless of what the merits of the
arguments may have been. This plays right into the hands of the Oracle lawyers.
They have sussed him out and just keep asking for the moon or re-asking what has
already been denied. It seems to be working.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 12 2012 @ 07:53 AM EDT |
I was about to say something along these lines myself. This judge makes comments
along the way that seem to indicate he sees through the Oracle shenanigans.
However, no matter how tough he talks, on almost every major issue he has given
way and favoured Oracle. I think the rot started in with Lindholm email where he
almost coaxed the privileged document forth from Oracle's counsel. The three
permitted attempts at a damages report from Cockburn have been a farce. Now we
have him overriding the jury on a clear decision they made. Not to overlook his
confusing and biased instructions to the jury to assume copyright applicability
to the SSO of the API signatures.
I find this judge to be inconsistent. He appears to understand things when they
are explained but it isn't retained, and in many instances he has forgotten what
he said days earlier and has to be reminded. His decisions have a haphazard
quality to them. It is almost as if he gives a little to each side (mainly
Oracle) to be seen to be even-handed regardless of what the merits of the
arguments may have been. This plays right into the hands of the Oracle lawyers.
They have sussed him out and just keep asking for the moon or re-asking what has
already been denied. It seems to be working.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Reasonable jury - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 12 2012 @ 08:14 AM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 12 2012 @ 11:31 AM EDT |
As with a pinball machine, you can only 'jiggle' it so far.
Then it gives up and you lose.
as I'm talking about this, I can't resist
Judge Alsop, sure plays a mean pinball....
Ok, it is the weekend.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|