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
yes, I have read both patents | 484 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
yes, I have read both patents
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 16 2012 @ 12:25 AM EDT
In a strange case of legal judo, Oracle seemed to be about to try and twist this
around backwards.

"According to your argument, the patent doesn't even cover a Java VM! But
that's preposterous, because of course it covers a Java VM, because, ...well, it
does! So obviously it must cover the similar Dalvik VM too!"

Google objected, because this trial is about whether Dalvik practices the claims
of the patent, and whether or not it a Java VM practices them is irrelevant.

----

I wonder what James Gosling would think of this whole business?

On the one hand, his name is on the '104 patent.

But on the other hand, he thinks software patents are ridiculous, and used to
play that game with his co-workers where they tried to get the goofiest patents
approved.

But back on the one hand, he thinks Google "really slimed Sun" and
should be made to pay somehow.

But on the other hand again, if he read any of the accounts of the testimony
from trial, he has to be cringing. The engineer in him would probably admit
that Dr. August's arguments were correct, and the '104 patent doesn't cover
either Dalvik or a Java VM. If his patent is effectively worthless now, does he
feel relief? Or annoyance? Or I wonder what.

[ 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 )