ALSUP: If I were you, I'd give up on the word interoperability. owwwwwww
-
-
ALSUP: [In that case] the sequence was not copyrightable. Maybe on appeal you should bring that to the attention of the federal circuit.
-
Onto the cost bill. A young lawyer is arguing for Oracle, a more senior lawyer is arguing for Google and Alsup is berating him
-
ALSUP: I think you're being greedy and asking for too much.
-
ALSUP: Do you know how many Social Security claimants I can't rule on right now because you're arguing over a cost bill
-
Alsup turns to Oracle. ALSUP: Tell me the most greedy act on Google's part as a reason for denying their bill of costs
-
Google has moved for court fees. Google is asking for 3.9 million, Oracle only wants to give them about 1 million.
-
This is a DROP in an ocean of attorneys' fees btw.
-
We're literally arguing over how expensive it is to print out TIFFs
-
Alsup's order is: You two, today is Wednesday, tomorrow and Friday, you two get to meet and confer all day long at whatever place you want.
-
ALSUP: Go through these line items and reach an agreement. Failing which I may just deny it because it’s greedy and overreaching.
-
ten minute break, presumably so Alsup can sit in chambers with some relaxing aromatherapy candles and chill the fuck out
-
Alsup aiming his flamethrower at everyone today
-
-
this is just stuff like transcripts and court appointed experts. not attorneys fees and definitely not their own experts.
-
Court is now back in session.
-
Hurst is arguing for a new trial.
-
Oracle is saying that material evidence was suppressed during this trial.
-
According to the briefings, Oracle is mad because during discovery, Google did not produce evidence regarding desktop Android
-
This announcement came during Google I/O. Which happened DURING the trial.
-
ORACLE: On the day Oracle rested its case, Google announced, “We’ve been working in secret for months, ...
-
and we’re building a whole new platform ... to run Android on Chromebook.”
-
ORACLE: Your honor, that announcement was directly contrary to the discovery answers that were given in this case.
-
Flashback: key argument in the case was that Android did not compete with Java SE because it was not for desktop.
-
ORACLE: Does this platform infringe? Yes, it incorporates the whole API of Marshmallow which they stipulated contains the 37 APIs.
-
ORACLE: Was this a game-changer? Of course it was a gamechanger.
-
ORACLE: The only thing their experts had to say under Factor 4 was that it was not harming Java SE because it’s not on desktops and laptops
-
ORACLE: This is outrageous. They were working on it for months. Google knew what they were doing.
-
ORACLE: They didn’t disclose it despite diligent discovery requests.
-
ORACLE: That whole foundation is gone. ... It’s not transformative now because it’s on desktops and laptops.
- 17 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.