Van Nest is going through Eric Schmidt's electric plug/outlet API analogy.
-
-
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
-
AND THEN HE ADDS ANOTHER ROW that says "Other Factors" lmao and it says "Good faith industry practice"
-
The weight of Google's evidence in this FAIR USE TRIAL has been on Factor 2 and "Other Factors"

-
Now going through Sun's failures to build Java-based smartphones.
-
And now, the Oracle failures.
-
I'd call this a low blow except Oracle's the one that sued for $9 billion.
-
Van Nest takes a moment to distinguish Douglas Schmidt (Oracle expert witness) from Eric Schmidt (Google top hat man)
-
Making the transformative argument by telling the story of how engineers picked and chose specific APIs, wrote own implementing code,
-
added libraries, etc. that were aimed specifically at smartphones. (Think cameras etc)
-
Using Dalvik and Linux kernel as well.
-
"At the end of the day there's virtually nothing in common with Android and Java SE."
-
Bizarrely, story of transformative use also resembles an argument that it's too functional to be copyrightable
-
What a weird case.
-
"Even their expert, Mr. Jaffe, called Android 'a feat not achieved by any other tech giant.'"
-
Google closing argument does hint a little at Google exceptionalism, but not in an uncouth way.
-
(Just thinking about that because I would *love* to hear more about that bat mitzvah)
-
Briefly mentioned at trial, actually.https://twitter.com/badlogicgames/status/734776051176443905 …
-
Two possibilities here: 1) barred as irrelevant 2) Google decided too confusing for juryhttps://twitter.com/badlogicgames/status/734776051176443905 …
-
"iPhones are very successful and they don't use Java at all."
-
We're still on Google's closing arguments. Now taking bets that Oracle will say the exact same thing to support THEIR case.
-
Now going over how Java SE market is doing just fine.
- 108 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.