Oracle/Google settlement talks fail, Java patent trial to start April 16

Originally Posted by Hungry Man

Right, this here is completely false. Companies pay settlements all the time because it's cheap and quick.

Not really. This happens to large companies all the time. Settling is usually the simplest way to resolve something.

Absurd. They don't pay all the time. Otherwise, anyone would make a company just to claim some violation to Google, and get paid. Basically, this is the implication of what you're saying.

Originally Posted by Hungry Man

which would be a bad thing for everyone

Not for Oracle.

[Hungry Man]

Absurd. They don't pay all the time. Otherwise, anyone would make a company just to claim some violation to Google, and get paid. Basically, this is the implication of what you're saying.

And this actually does happen very very often. I'm not going to Google legal cases for something so commonplace. Look up some McDonalds cases where people sue them for being fat or some other ridiculous case that could have been dragged out in court but they settled because it's the cheapest and simplest solution. This happens all the time.

Settlement does not mean admission of guilt. It means you're willing to shut them up with money so you can move on.

Not for Oracle.

Obviously. Like I said.

Stop the nonsense. If this was so commonplace, companies wouldn't survive. There are some bizarre cases yes.

[Hungry Man]

Seriously? You don't know this?

This is very commonplace. You're talking about multibillion dollar companies, they do just fine despite the occasional case brought against them.

Now you talk about occasional case. If companies paid settlements all the time (as you said), the cases wouldn't be occasional.

[Pedro]

Originally Posted by guest

Now you talk about occasional case. If companies paid settlements all the time (as you said), the cases wouldn't be occasional.

Do you have any idea how you sound like?

He obviously means it happens all the time, not that it happens everyday for any one company. Holly s... man!

And Google has presented as evidence quotes from the former Sun CEO stating how cool it was that Google was doing what they did. It may not hold, but if you could just read more about the case to see that this is not a simple affair.

[Dermot7]

by guest: If companies paid settlements all the time (as you said), the cases wouldn't be occasional.

Especially so if the settlement payouts were for $1 billion or even more.

[Hungry Man]

Originally Posted by guest

Now you talk about occasional case. If companies paid settlements all the time (as you said), the cases wouldn't be occasional.

Did you actually think that I meant no cases ever go to court and they're always settled? I said it happens "all the time" ie: very often.

They're often very large settlements but naturally not in the order of billions. If you're dealing with a person saying "Hey, McD's you made me fat" you can probably pay them off with hundreds of thousands or millions. A large company's gonna take billions.

Like I said before, settlements are very common.

EDIT: Here PeterPan,

https://duckduckgo.com/?t=lm&q=microsoft+settles

Look at how "guilty" Microsoft is!

[vasa1]

I couldn't have told you the first thing about Java before this problem. I have done, and still do, a significant amount of programming in other languages. I've written blocks of code like rangeCheck a hundred times before. I could do it, you could do it.

That's the judge trying the case!

[vasa1]

http://asia.cnet.com/android-doesnt-...y-62215663.htm

My life is so pathetic that that ^^^ is the best news I've read in a while.

[vasa1]

Judge:

Judge:
Jury can talk or not talk to anyone, but please be accurate because inaccuracy can lead to evidentiary hearing and impeachment of verdict.
...
I haven't had a jury in a civil case that has gone this long, "longest civil trial" and you all have been a superb jury, and this country is a great country, because of citizens like you who are willing to sacrifice and come in as you have. Thanks them on behalf of country and Federal court.
...

More at groklaw.net

Imagine if Oracle had gone after someone less willing to stand up to patent bullying.

[vasa1]

Interview with the jury foreman.

"The more tech savvy a person is, the more difficult it might be to convince them of something that would limit [technology]... and future expansion of the common good," he said.

That quickly shifted to a situation where Thompson was the lone pro-Oracle holdout, he said. Of the array of technical questions sent to the judge during deliberations, many were his own, Thompson said. Finally, realizing he wasn't swaying anyone else to his side, he determined that Oracle hadn't met its burden of proof and Google should be off the hook. "The nail that's poking up eventually gets beaten down," Thompson said, smiling.

things never got too heated, he told reporters. "It wasn't malicious. People kept on an even keel. I don't see any kind of bad blood."

The pro-Google majority wasn't exactly all warm and fuzzy towards Google, though. During the case, Google's lawyers repeatedly showed off the statements that ex-Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz made congratulating Google on Android's launch. Some jurors believed Google relied on that blog post by Schwartz too heavily, however. "We felt like it wasn't a good business practice to rely on a blog," Thompson said. "Some of us had an underlying feeling that Google had done something that wasn't right."

Inquiring minds want to know, you - vasa1- use Android?

"Oracle presented overwhelming evidence at trial that Google knew it would fragment and damage Java," Oracle spokeswoman Deborah Hellinger told Bloomberg in an e-mailed statement. "We plan to continue to defend and uphold Java's core write once run anywhere principle and ensure it is protected for the nine million Java developers and the community that depend on Java compatibility."

[vasa1]

And from a highly repected blogger:
Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, ZDNet, "Google kicks Oracle in its patent teeth"

Translation of vasa1 post? highly "repected" blogger = money grabber troll?

[vasa1]

No doubt the other side will bring out their expert, Florian Mueller.

Interesting indeed. http://www.fosspatents.com/

[Hungry Man]

"The more tech savvy a person is, the more difficult it might be to convince them of something that would limit [technology]... and future expansion of the common good," he said.

This is so true lol

[vasa1]

Apparently, the jury was useless!

A jury trial on patent infringement is a lottery since anyone who really would have the knowledge that is needed to understand the issue typically gets excluded. Also, different juries have different tendencies. Google was very lucky with this jury.

But yes, it means that this jury was an unreasonable one.

http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/05/j...ringe-two.html

That guy's not going to get his bonus!

Originally Posted by vasa1

Apparently, the jury was useless!

That guy's not going to get his bonus!

The truth hurts, doesn't it?

[vasa1]

Google general counsel Kent Walker said the company felt it was important to send a message by taking the case to trial.

"We didn't want to back down when we felt the facts were on our side," Walker told Reuters.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...?newsfeed=true

Lol, yeah, hypocrisy masters!

To dispute infringement of Oracle's patents, Google contradicts its own source code comments and file names

[Hungry Man]

Can I just say that I find it hilarious that anyone is supporting this. I've literally not yet seen one programmer/ savvy person agree.

edit: Hilarious but a bit sad.

From that link:
"...Even though Google has raised multiple issues with respect to the Gosling patent, none of its arguments makes sense to me (I've done a fair amount of programming and authored books on programming techniques and operating systems)..."