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 517468
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Insanity?
by AdamW on Wed 9th May 2012 16:44 UTC in reply to "Insanity?"
Member since:

"Of course, a judge cannot order a jury to deliver any verdict"

Actually, judges can direct juries to acquit, in certain circumstances.

Reply Parent Score: 2