Discussion in 'other software & services' started by guest, Apr 3, 2012.
To paraphrase: it is all business
Any links to sites that report in detail?
Here's one on the jury: http://venturebeat.com/2012/04/16/oracle-google-jury/
And this one is leaning one way, IMO, but here's the link:
How to escape jury duty:
(JA's the judge.)
Hmmm... I was hoping more members would post here
Specifically, is there any other site like Groklaw but with a different perspective?
Oracle and the End of Programming As We Know It by Andrew Binstock.
Pity. I hope Google takes steps in future to secure itself, and those who are associated with it, against such misadventures. Anyway, diehards are still hoping that the judge may go the European way.
The diehards are the Google fanboys which don't appreciate justice. Keep crying.
This will just work it's way through the courts, probably all the way to the Supreme Court and it will take years. Appeals are guaranteed.
I have no love for Google, but I'm thinking this might be a bad decision. The ability to limit other people's use of an idea - not an implementation of an idea, but an idea - is IMO poison for any sort of innovation. What are the repercussions? Is this going to hurt independent developers in the long run?
Also, I have to ask if the idea of patenting a language makes sense to you. It doesn't make sense to me. Things composed of human-readable characters, with publicly available documentation, should IMHO not be any more patentable than English is.
Oh, if only this were Oracle v Microsoft! lol
I don't care much about this trial and haven't read about it. I honestly just want Oracle to lose because it is flat out the most backwards tech company and everyone pretty much agrees on that.
I want them to lose for multiple reasons. And I am no fan of Google so that isn't one of them.
Whether or not one is a Google fanboi, the fact is, for now, that Google is not buckling unlike various other players who make secret agreements or accept money to withdraw litigation. The software industry should welcome the judicial clarity that will ultimately emerge, whether it is to Google's detriment or otherwise.
HAHAHA what a load of bs, you're trying to paint Google as an angel against the evil patent system.
Google tried to "buckle" (lol), it just failed at it. Google proposed a damages payment to Oracle of $2.8 million. Oracle rejected.
Ultimately, even Google knows it is guilty.
Pardon the bad pun, but it looks like the "Oracle" has spoken!
No, one doesn't need to be an oracle to understand what's going on here. Common sense is all you need, plus a little bit of honesty and less idiotic feelings for certain companies and causes.
Woah... let's not mix up a settlement with an admission of guilt. Companies pay out settlements all of the time because they're cheaper and it usually just appeases the other party ("I tripped on your sidewalk give me money!" *giant company drops a penny in a bucket*) and I don't think anyone is trying to paint Google as an angel.
People have disliked the patent system for longer than Google's been around. People have hated Oracle for as long as it's been around.
If Google didn't consider itself guilty of something, it wouldn't offer Oracle $2.8 million in damages.
The way you put it, whenever a company claim some violation by Google, Google pay them. This is a ridiculous supposition.
vasa1 tried to paint google as an angel when she/he said this bs: "Google is not buckling unlike various other players who make secret agreements or accept money to withdraw litigation."
This is an obvious, flagrant, ridiculous lie. Google tried to do that, but failed.
As for the patent system, I doubt it will change in a court. This is something for congress to discuss. A court applies/analyses the existing law.
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.
By the way...
I don't think you understand the implications or the content of this trial. This is not a simple patent case, this would set a precedent (and that IS something for the courts) on patenting APIs/ copywriting interfaces, which would be a bad thing for everyone (not that Oracle cares because, again, they are very often considered the worst company in their field.)
That's not so much an attempt to insult you as it is to ground you. Understand what this trial is.
You're wasting your time. Again
Separate names with a comma.