|
Authored by: BJ on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 05:01 PM EDT |
Sorry.
Seeing is believing.
Oracle and esp. Ellison like their money too much.
I will not cheer on this one.
bjd
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Good guys are those that 'invalidate' their own patents first - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 05:04 PM EDT
- Oracle is a top contributor to Linux - Authored by: IMANAL_TOO on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 05:13 PM EDT
- Good guys are those that 'invalidate' their own patents first - Authored by: ChrixOne on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 05:23 PM EDT
- ROFL - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 06:46 PM EDT
- ROFL - Authored by: DCFusor on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 07:06 PM EDT
- ROFL - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 07:23 PM EDT
- ROFL - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 12:46 PM EDT
- ROFL - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 11:08 AM EDT
- ROFL - Authored by: Tyro on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 03:25 PM EDT
- That was never enabled, was it? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 07:20 PM EDT
- M$ was never good! - Authored by: tiger99 on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 11:23 AM EDT
- Good guys are those that 'invalidate' their own patents first - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 06 2012 @ 06:31 AM EDT
- Good guys are those that 'invalidate' their own patents first - Authored by: DannyB on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 05:44 PM EDT
- Good guys are those that 'invalidate' their own patents first - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 06:01 PM EDT
- fundamental problem ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 06:59 PM EDT
- "Good Guys" Hypocrisy - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 08:15 PM EDT
- I will stand by Ellison and cheer for Oracle... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 10:10 AM EDT
- Good guys are those that 'invalidate' their own patents first - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 01:37 PM EDT
- You are making a mistake... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 06 2012 @ 05:07 PM EDT
|
Authored by: entre on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 05:11 PM EDT |
Post them here [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: StormReaver on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 05:13 PM EDT |
Thankfully, Oracle is not represented by BS&F. At least now, Oracle has a
chance of winning.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 05:16 PM EDT |
I wonder if this was all a strategy by Oracle? Sue Google,
plan on being defeated, then use that defeat as precedent to
defeat others ?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 05:22 PM EDT |
If Oracle had Judge Alsup on the new case, then that would be to their
advantage.
And, ours. Anything to weaken the software patent trolls is a huge gain for all
in tech (these trolls don't make or invent anything).
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: designerfx on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 05:24 PM EDT |
off topic comments here [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Mathics - A free, light-weight alternative to Mathematica - GPL - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 09:46 PM EDT
- facebook privacy? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 10:36 PM EDT
- facebook privacy? - Authored by: bilateralrope on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 02:00 AM EDT
- Simple solution. - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 07:58 AM EDT
- If in Europe - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 08:37 AM EDT
- If in Europe - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 08:56 AM EDT
- If in Europe - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 09:20 AM EDT
- If in Europe - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 12:31 PM EDT
- If in Europe - Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 12:48 PM EDT
- Also - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 01:06 PM EDT
- If in Europe - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 04:34 PM EDT
- US example - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 06 2012 @ 05:20 AM EDT
- If in Europe - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 06 2012 @ 06:14 AM EDT
- facebook privacy? - Authored by: wharris on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 09:56 AM EDT
- facebook privacy? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 01:04 PM EDT
- Last 6 articles by PJ - Authored by: josmith42 on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 10:56 PM EDT
- This one's *for* PJ - Authored by: Ed L. on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 12:10 AM EDT
- Mono - Authored by: jonathon on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 10:14 AM EDT
- Mono - Authored by: JamesK on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 10:21 AM EDT
- Mono - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 10:53 AM EDT
- ROFL - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 11:51 AM EDT
- Last 6 articles by PJ - Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 12:51 AM EDT
- FBI: New Internet addresses could hinder police investigations - Authored by: JamesK on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 10:33 AM EDT
- Windows Server Sales Flat in Q1, Compared With Linux Models: IDC - Authored by: JamesK on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 01:04 PM EDT
- off topic thread - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 03:17 PM EDT
- News Picks: Ari Emanuel Wants You to Shut Up and Pay Up - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 05:19 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 05:43 PM EDT |
It stops being funny when it starts being you. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Steve Martin on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 06:35 PM EDT |
This is the A Team, ladies and gentlemen.
I can't help but wonder, if this is the "A" team, why
Oracle settled merely for Boies Schiller & Flexner when they went up against
Google.
(And yes, that was intended to be
tongue-in-cheek.)
--- "When I say something, I put my name next to
it." -- Isaac Jaffe, "Sports Night" [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: calris74 on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 06:40 PM EDT |
Does this mean Groklaw and FOSSPatents will be pushing the
same agenda?
My world just dimmed a little :([ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: mushroom on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 06:48 PM EDT |
Any-one verses a Patten Troll I'd route for the any-one,
even if the any-one was Microsoft. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: BitOBear on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 06:56 PM EDT |
Is the evil threesome involved in this or did they get a rational council?
If Oracle is in the right on something we have to hope that they aren't using
anybody irrational to fight their case lest they lose something important.
I think it sounds like this fight was picked -with- Oracle not -by- Oracle.
It's a case of "when bad things happen to bad people" because you have
to judge people not by the positions they find themselves defending but by the
positions they find themselves attacking.
It would be bad if Oracle uses inferior lawyering to fight a position we need
them to win.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 07:13 PM EDT |
Just the four patents? Or do they have others, and Oracle is only being
affected by the four?
MSS2[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: davecb on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 07:48 PM EDT |
PJ wrote:
I know. Oracle is now the good guy. Major good
guy.
See why I always tell you that to avoid whiplash, don't look at the
parties in litigation and decide who you like, but anaylze the issues involved
and plant your flag accordingly? Hence, here we are, on the same side of this
issue, Groklaw and Oracle. Who'd-a thunk it last week?
Corporations are peculiar beings: if they're to be considered
people, then so are swarms of bees and flocks of birds.
Corporations are
collections of individual people, trying to fly in formation. Sometimes it
works, other times you get totally inconsistent results.
Expect corporations
to behave like absent-minded professors at best, psychopaths at worst.
I
used to work for Sun, which was mostly a California Cowboy company, except when
it wasn't (:-))
--dave
--- davecb@spamcop.net [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Yossarian on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 07:52 PM EDT |
If, as I expect, Lodsys will lose, will not it be able to play
bankruptcy games, SCO's style, and pay Oracle nothing?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: maroberts on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 08:10 PM EDT |
..applied to the Patent Office for a review of these patents in a similar way to
Google, or is it likely to do so now it has commenced its action?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 08:19 PM EDT |
I suspect that Oracle is acting in its own interests still, it just so happens
that our interests coincide on this one. That is, of course, still a good
thing.
If only we could get all the patent trolls to sue each other into oblivion....[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 10:09 PM EDT |
This jumped off the page at me.
I wonder if you can sure someone for previously infringing on a patent after it
expires?
---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.
"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: clemenstimpler on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 10:46 PM EDT |
Even though companies are treated as persons in many areas of US law (sometimes,
in my view, with detrimental consequences, think of campaign spending), there is
no need to believe that organisations as such have a 'moral character'. So to
say that 'Oracle is the good guy' is just figurative speech.
At
times, we may feel some sort of loyalty to a corporation, e. g. a sports team.
But a fan that is capable of giving rational reasons for his allegiance to a
sports team is by definition not a fan. Assertions to the contrary
notwithstanding, sports is in itself fairly unimportant - that is why we can
afford to invest emotions in what is going on there.
I press this
point, because what we are talking about on Groklaw are civil proceedings. Their
moral dimension is secondary. These law suits are relevant, because they have
consequences for what we hold dear, namely the cause of free software. And yes,
the success of free software cannot be explained merely by rational decisions
about costs and benefits.
Nevertheless, progress for this cause
depends on assessing the consequences in the legal realm with a certain amount
of sobriety. Until now, our group identity as followers of the FOSS movement has
been informed by our foes, particularly Microsoft. It may be an indication of
maturity to leave this mindset behind.
Red Hat and Canonical can only
exist, because they have pledged allegiance to free software. Others, like
Apple, IBM and Oracle, have a somewhat uneasy relationship to the FOSS movement.
Some, like Adobe and Microsoft, believe that their business model can succeed
without FOSS.
But even if we believe that the FOSS model of
developing software is morally superior to the business model of some of these
companies, the success of free software will not depend on a moral assessment of
business models, but on coming to terms with the legal challenges corporate
actions pose to the environment free software requires. Sometimes a morally
reprehensible business model may lead to choices that will further our
cause.
When German president Gustav Heinemann was asked whether he
loves his country (there is even a word for that in German: 'Vaterlandsliebe'),
he merely answered: "Oh no, I won't love states, I only love my wife." ("Ach
was, ich liebe keine Staaten, ich liebe meine Frau; fertig!"). We should
follow his example in keeping things in perspective.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 07:07 AM EDT |
Maybe it is just one patent troll suing another to keep it
off what it considers its own turf - you know like large
entities who can afford the patent litigation fees and even
afford to lose money on patent litigation as a price it is
willing to pay in order to enforce a monopoly, putting out of
business smaller trolls who might threaten its turf by also
extorting money. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 07:44 AM EDT |
Do you suppose "such other and further relief as the Court may
deem just and proper," could end up yielding damages for
common law extortion? That would be a fine "fare thee well"
ending for any troll bashing lawsuit.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jesse on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 08:04 AM EDT |
All are the same thing, in different words.
The diagram is identical, other than a change in font.
And is a "done on a computer" type of process.
As a funny note - Oracle should get assistance from Google on 20100268704. This
is EXACTLY what google does and has been doing ever since it existed.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 08:07 AM EDT |
No sympathy for either here:
1) Live by the sword, die by the sword.
2) If you can't take it, don't dish it out.
3) If you go to war, be prepared to loose.
4) Those who abuse the patent system should expect no less
from others.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Witness on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 09:46 AM EDT |
I don't trust Oracle.
Likely they will find a way to make the end result favor only Oracle.
---
Witness[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 10:31 AM EDT |
Do we know which companies are behind Lodsys?
I know a lot of their "investors" are really better characterised as
"victims".
I'm mostly just wondering if Oracle is on their list of investors.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Lodsys' backers? - Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 11:39 AM EDT
- RICO, anyone? - Authored by: cjk fossman on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 11:54 AM EDT
- RICO, anyone? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 02:46 PM EDT
- RICO, anyone? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 06 2012 @ 04:38 AM EDT
- RICO, anyone? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 06 2012 @ 08:01 AM EDT
- Lodsys' backers? - Authored by: 351-4V on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 11:50 AM EDT
- Lodsys' backers? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 12:37 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 03:01 PM EDT |
I don't know anything about the patents, the software, the customers.
But I did notice that Oracle is operating as a computer services company,
according to their description.
So not only is Oracle defending their software but also (mainly?) their revenue
stream as a hosting company for these customers.
It would be like having someone sue me for using a tool offered by my ISP (the
proverbial Insta-Web Shopping Cart version 0.9). Bit of an echo of the EV1 case
back in the SCO heyday.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: cxd on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 03:52 PM EDT |
I sent this to multiple Google support teams, and
developers.
Comment by Pamela Jones (PJ) on Groklaw.net one of the most
wide read legal blogs for software engineers and those
involved with the law. The blog has well over 100,000 hits
per day. It has now been accepted as an archived site by
the Library of Congress. It will be available to legal
scholars, law students, technologists and scientists for all
time.
From the News Picks on Groklaw June 5th 2012.
PJ had a valid comment that went out to all of her readers
Groklaw.net
If you are unaware of this site, ask any of your developers,
management, or legal teams. They will all know about this
site.
Her comment was valid and requires attention immediately if
Google wishes to keep the geek community supporting certain
of its websites.
Here is her quote about your announcement.
[PJ: I just want to say that I hate it that Google makes you
turn on cookies and Javascript to read the Official Google
Blog. That's not nice. It may be an overlooked issue decided
on a lower level. But whatever made that happen, please
stop. Or I'll have to stop visiting. I gave up the NY Times
over that issue, and I'll give up Google blogs too. It's
nobody's business what I read.] -
I agree with her, I also abandoned the NY Times. If you do
not fix this problem I will also stop visiting and some of
the millions that follow her blog will also stop. Please do
not offend the geeks. They have only provided your legal
team with so much free advice in order help you defeat of
Oracle. It makes no sense to offend those who are your
supporters with technical knowledge.
I worked on one of the first Android development phones the
OpenMoko and am a Droid supporter. My family has 5 Android
phones and we will not change platforms.
I would love to debug or help with code for your pure
Android phones that are coming out. Let me know if you
would like my free input and help.
Please follow your motto in this instance...... First do no
harm...... Your actions now are causing harm. It should be
an easy fix. Listen to your supporters in the tech
community and you will win.
Love your company. Not all company's have the vision and
lead in so many areas and still stay as honest as you have.
Please consider PJ and my advice..... and solve this
problem.
Looking forward to a pure Google phone with no add on. My
current phone was promised upgrade ability but now T- Moble
has decided to not upgrade to ICE cream sandwich. Now I
will wait until my 1 year warranty expires to root my
families phones and upgrade to ICS.
Have a super day. Do what is right let the consequence
follow.
cxd
Open Hardware Development
From a Hymn.
Do what is right let the consequence follow. Now is the
battle between freedom and might.
Do what is right let the consequence follow. Now is the
battle for freedom and right.
---
cxd[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: sproggit on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 04:25 PM EDT |
Have you ever had that experience of buying a new car. You drive it around for a
week or two, and suddenly you spot the same make and model everywhere?
Maybe I'm the same with Oracle and press articles. We've just had a
major court case involving Oracle and Google, and suddenly I see them in the
news a bit more than usual.
Take this article,
for example. It chronicles a day in the life of Mr Ellison when he was serving
as a juror on a court case. During a break he drafted a press release that would
announce that Oracle would end support for the Itanium processor. The article is
worth a read, if only for the way it describes the firestorm that followed the
breaking of that news. The result? HP are suing Oracle for Billions.
Back in December last year, Oracle's Quarterly Earnings Report got
short shrift over at AllT
hingsD, where they titled a review article "What Went Wrong With Oracle's
Quarter?". In fairness, Oracle comfortable out-performed Google on % share
growth, and left Microsoft for dust [the latter saw a $1.50 drop in
value of 5 years, while oracle grew 35% in the same time period.
I
really haven't been paying that much attention to Oracle overall, even when they
were embroiled in the Google case. But it got me wondering. Could it be that Mr
Ellison is losing his "Midas Touch"?
I am curious to know what other
Groklawrians think... Is this just coincidence? Is this a case of Oracle
beginning to lose their way? Are we observing the beginnings of the kind of
boardroom melt-down that pretty near destroyed HP? [ Do you remember the
pretexting scandal? ] Or is this just a brief succession of big waves before the
Good Ship Oracle makes it to calmer seas?
Has anyone else observed any
other curious strategic decisions? Is there a bigger trend here? Major changes
in executive management?
It's just very interesting to see how the
company is now more famous for it's court room battles than it's database
technology... Well, almost.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 05 2012 @ 08:44 PM EDT |
My emphasis. We learned during Google vs Oracle not to trust headlines of the
sort that is in the Newspick: so why is it there?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Ian Al on Wednesday, June 06 2012 @ 11:59 AM EDT |
I had this wizard idea to invalidate the patents. The argument is that the
internet became commercialised in the mid 1990s (Wikipedia) and Javascript
became available in browsers in 1996.
If the patents had their origins
before, say, 1997, then perhaps the technology was not there on the internet in
order to implement them. Ideas in a patent with no means of implementation is an
attempt to patent abstract ideas rather than an invention, which makes the
patent invalid.
This is what I found in Exhibit B.
Patent
No.: US 7,133,834 B1
Date of Patent: Nov. 7, 2006
Filed: Aug. 6,
1999
Related U.S. Application Data
Continuation of application
No. 08/934,457, files on Sep. 19, 1997, now Pat. No. 5,999,908, which is a
continuation of application No. 08/243,638, filed on May 16, 1994, now
abandoned, which is a continuation-in-part of application No. 07/926,333, filed
on Aug. 6, 1992, now abandoned.
The 1992 and 1994 dates are early
enough to invalidate the patent, but the 1999 filing date is late enough for the
internet to implement it. The abstract says 'An electronically accessible server
receives, stores, and sends value information from customers'. It shows a
software requester asking the customer to rate the software by means of a
questionaire. I could only see this realistically being implemented via the
internet after 1996.
What do you think? That 'Related U.S. Application
Data' has me stumped because I don't understand the relevance. Has this
invalidation approach got legs?--- Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Confused - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 06 2012 @ 12:16 PM EDT
- Thanks - Authored by: Ian Al on Thursday, June 07 2012 @ 01:55 AM EDT
- Confused - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 07 2012 @ 03:05 AM EDT
|
Authored by: dio gratia on Friday, June 08 2012 @ 01:51 AM EDT |
For those who routinely block anonymous comments. Please provide the title and
a link for the News Picks for which you are commenting.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|