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
Look at the current case | 278 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Look at the current case
Authored by: jbb on Thursday, June 21 2012 @ 04:47 PM EDT
If the case law was as you say then why did the API claims in the current case have to go to trial? They went to trial precisely because the current case law is not clear. As I've said before, Judge Alsup's ruling is by far the best summation of the current state of the situation I've seen. If case law was clear (and in favor of Google) then the API claims would have been thrown out in summary judgment.

A lot of the early upset and ire on Groklaw at Judge Alsup was due to the mistaken idea that case law on this issue was completely settled years ago. Judge Alsup realized this was not true so he went to great lengths to ensure that it would become settled after this case has gone through appeals. One thing this case highlighted for me was the vast difference between what is known and accepted in the real-world and what is known and accepted in the law books and in case law. Judge Alsup's ruling takes a giant leap towards bringing the law books and case law into accord with the real-world.

---
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 | # ]

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 )