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 517320
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Sigh. Thom.
by Doc Pain on Tue 8th May 2012 10:34 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Sigh. Thom."
Doc Pain
Member since:
2006-10-08

Not familiar with out-of-order execution and branch prediction are we?


Oh, some legal systems really are out of order, sometimes there even should be an execution, and predicting how branches would behave means entering the magical realm of dreaming fairies and wonder bunnies. This means: You cannot beat law with logic, because it's often free of any common sense, just like my comment. :-)

Reply Parent Score: 3