Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 7th May 2012 20:09 UTC
Legal There's some movement in the Oracle-Google lawsuit today, but it's rather difficult to determine just what kind of movement. The jury was told by the judge Alsup to assume APIs are copyrightable - something Alsup still has to determine later during trial - and with that in mind, the judge ruled Google violated Oracle's copyright on Java. However, the jury did not come to an agreement on a rather crucial question: whether or not it was fair use. All in all, a rather meaningless verdict at this point, since it's incomplete. Also, what kind of nonsense is it for a judge to tell a jury to assume something is illegal? Am I the only one who thinks that's just complete insanity?
Permalink for comment 517324
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Groklaw covers this pretty good
by dgun on Tue 8th May 2012 12:45 UTC
Member since:

I caught two brief CNBC reports on this. Both times I just knew they wouldn't mention the fact that the judge would be deciding whether or not APIs are copyrightable. And they didn't disappoint me.

Anyway, buried in one of the threads at Groklaw someone mentions, along with the main point that others have made here concerning matters of law and matters of fact, that the Judge is going this route in anticipation of appeals.

Reply Score: 2