Van Nest begins his closing arugments on behalf of Google.
-
-
Like I've thought: Google is mounting a damages case inside of a shell of a fair use case.
-
"Android is exactly the kind of thing the fair use doctrine was supposed to protect."
-
"Android engineers used... in less than one half of one percent of the code"
-
We're now going into the fair use factors, but Van Ness says, "Those factors are not exclusive."
-
"Fair use is meant to promote innovation and change." Van Nest says jurors can take into account any factors w/r/t the purpose of fair use.
-
"Android is not a substitute for Java. ... It's not like Java SE, it's not like Java ME."
-
* "Sun developed the Java programming language and made it free for all to use."
-
I should add that owning an Android phone does not bias me towards Google.https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/734760121285238785 …
-
If anything I have to work to not let my shit phone sway my feelings here
-
Van Nest is going through Eric Schmidt's electric plug/outlet API analogy.
-
The API is the interface-- the outlet. The implementation is sun power, wind power, etc.
-
Van Nest now going through Schwartz's analogy. "His was hamburgers for breakfast, remember?" lol
-
Van Nest points out that even though Oracle tried to attack Schwartz for being a bad CEO, "Sun IS Oracle."
-
Now going through Phipps's writings on the official Sun website—FAQs aimed at the FOSS dev community.
-
Sun said they supported open interfaces, and that's consistent with Schmidt and Schwartz testimonies.
-
Going through Oracle testimony — live testimony here and depos — about how APIs are critical to the java language.
-
Slide says: "Sun's Business Model: A Rising Tide Lifts All Boats"
-
Schwartz official statements about supporting Android, etc.
-
Schwartz email to Schmidt: Let us known how we can help.
-
Now a very dense timeline. Can't read text from second row. Too tiny.
-
Timeline includes TX#s (exhibit numbers), presumably this will be in the jury room to help the jury out.
-
Van Nest is leaning heavily on Schwartz's testimony, as representing what Sun (now Oracle) intended and meant.
-
I'm not sure how the jury reads this. I know the industry reads the situation as Oracle subverting Sun's values after acquisition.
-
In my opinion, it's almost irrelevant to fair use.
-
But it sure has the potential to make Oracle look like a bunch of dicks.
-
Now going through Ellison's statements at JavaOne and a joint presentation by Sun-Oracle, to show that Oracle adopted these principles
-
(Something that I think the industry doesn't really believe, but this is part of the Google story at trial)
-
Now going through the Fair use factors. Under Factor 2, Van Nest says that it's "Functional." EYEBROW RAISED
-
Factor 1: Highly transformative Factor 2: Functional Factor 3: Tiny Fraction Factor 4: Not a substitute
- 128 réponses de plus
Nouvelle conversation -
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.