Authored by: charlie Turner on Friday, May 25 2012 @ 08:52 PM EDT |
What do they think that will buy them, exactly?
3
blank faced stares from the appellate panel would be my guess. And, probably one
from Judge Alsup, too.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: clemenstimpler on Friday, May 25 2012 @ 09:20 PM EDT |
The document referenced by Oracle is mentioned in the Google brief as well. A
footnote mentions that it has been submitted by Google as an attachment
to an exhibit (Docket 369-3). It can be found
here:
http://groklawstatic.ibiblio.org/pdf3/OraGoogle-369ExGG.pdf [PDF].
So
Oracle tries to win a brownie from the court for trying ("we really wanted to,
Your Honor, but it was so awfully hard"), but in fact they only rely on
something that Google has brought to the attention of the court. Bad luck that
Google mentioned the document in its own brief as well... [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: dio gratia on Saturday, May 26 2012 @ 07:07 AM EDT |
Right up there with being surprised by Christmas.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: artp on Saturday, May 26 2012 @ 08:51 AM EDT |
They really didn't want to talk about the stuff in that
brief. Really. There was no way to do that without imploding
their case even worse than it already was. Really, what else
could they say?
So they stand with hat in hand, telling the judge how
terribly hard it would be to find that awful brief that they
stuck in the second drawer down in their desk, behind the
jar of peanuts and the blackberry brandy (for medicinal
purposes only, of course).
It is such terrible bad news that an attorney shouldn't have
to face that first thing in the morning without having
SOMETHING that goes in their favor.
It just isn't FAIR!
---
Userfriendly on WGA server outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Ian Al on Saturday, May 26 2012 @ 11:33 AM EDT |
At least you did not bring the dog into the discussion.
Got to go and stifle hysteria, now.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|