Alsup asks the bee-sting juror if her bee-stings are better. They are better.
-
-
Google internal emails (non-lawyers speculating!) said they needed a license, that the alternatives "all sucked."
-
All the other companies that used Java licensed their product.
-
Guessing that the half-an-ass email is coming back, too.
-
And the bat mitzvah, too.
-
Oracle emphasizes that lines of declaring code and the structure, sequence, and organization of the 37 packages are copyright infringement—
-
—as per the jury instructions, which are of course due to the Federal Circuit opinion.
-
"This case is about an excuse. I call it the fair use excuse."
-
Oracle says that the internal docs at Google all show that they never thought it was fair use.
-
I think you guys know what I think about that
-
"The first factor will be commerciality." ????????
-
We're now going through this part of the fair use provision: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107 …pic.twitter.com/kumHbcpgkA
-
"Things like criticism. Android is not criticism. Things like comment. Android is not comment. Things like news reporting. Android is not.."
-
You get it.
-
Now going through how much $ Google made from Android, using internal docs from Google itself, like one that says "Search + Android = HUGE"
-
Oracle says that Android is a "43 billion dollar ecosystem," and is the "height of commerciality."
-
"The second question is transformative." ??????????????
-
this is an extremely.... interesting... way to organize a fair use inquiry
-
(Oracle says Google's use of Android is not transformative, go figure)
-
Oracle points to 11,500 lines of code, copied across many versions.
-
Doug Schmidt testified that the packages were used for the same purposes. E.g., java.security was used for... security
-
Which, like
-
You know
-
ANYWAYS, MOVING ON
-
"Sun licensed Java SE for use in smartphones. Sun licensed Java ME for use in feature and smartphones."
-
"Java was in feature and smartphones before the launch of Android. They were the market leaders in both areas."
-
"If you're looking at phones, this isn't a revolution, this is an evolution."
-
Sun was in smartphones first, he says. I think he's referring to Blackberry and SavaJe
-
"These phones are not the same as the phones today," says Bicks.
-
In a nod to how shitty the SavaJe looks, he says the hardware is different, but "if you look under the hood" they used the same software.
-
Admits that SavaJe is "wasn’t a big success."
- 50 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.