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?
Thread beginning with comment 517316
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Sigh. Thom.
by Athlander on Tue 8th May 2012 07:46 UTC in reply to "RE: Sigh. Thom."
Member since:

I find a jury system insane enough even without nonsense like this, but alas. I'm glad we don't have this medieval nonsense in this country.

Are you glad you have the inherently flawed Dutch system? Just wondering.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Sigh. Thom.
by MOS6510 on Tue 8th May 2012 17:53 in reply to "RE[2]: Sigh. Thom."
MOS6510 Member since:

I was involved in 3 court cases, one included a charge of hacking, and 3 times I came out a winner so this Dutch person is quite happy with the system!

Reply Parent Score: 2