|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 23 2012 @ 05:02 PM EDT |
unless the jury found infringement.
To avoid the damages phase.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 23 2012 @ 05:10 PM EDT |
As I read the coverage hear on Groklaw, Google's 'settlement' offer was
along the lines of **if we are found to infringe on your patents** here is
what we believe are reasonable values for settlement. There was no offer
saying take this money as settlement and go away,[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jbb on Wednesday, May 23 2012 @ 06:20 PM EDT |
We've heard these lies about Google before. They were answered before. Right
before the trial started, the judge insisted both sides try to settle. During
those talks Google offered what they thought was a reasonable settlement. The
amount would not have covered Oracle's legal expenses for the years of
preparation for the trial and might have been on par with Google's costs for
going through with the trial.
Google did NOT offer an early
settlement. They offered a settlement right before the trial. When you include
legal expenses, the settlement would have been a significant financial loss for
Oracle. I don't see how that settlement offer would possibly encourage more
behavior like Oracle's unless companies are looking for a way to lose a lot of
money in a publicly embarrassing and humiliating fashion. Oracle refused the
settlement because they saw it as an admission of defeat. They preferred to
double down and take a shot at winning the litigation lottery.
--- Our job is to remind ourselves that there are more contexts
than the one we’re in now — the one that we think is reality.
-- Alan Kay [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|