4 ms·

First: No, I didn't leave anything out. Review the link I included in my last comment. Hold on to the Federal Circuit as a personal stick in your craw if you

First: No, I didn't leave anything out. Review the link I included in my last comment. Hold on to the Federal Circuit as a personal stick in your craw if you want, but I didn't leave it out. Second: That's a stretch. To argue that the case would have stopped at the Ninth Circuit is to argue that because the Supreme Court denied Google's petition to reverse the Federal Circuit, then they would have denied Oracle's petition to reverse the Ninth Circuit. That's a junk argument.

wtallis 9y ago
> To argue that the case would have stopped at the Ninth Circuit is to argue that because the Supreme Court denied Google's petition to reverse the Federal Circuit, then they would have denied Oracle's petition to reverse the Ninth Circuit. That's not the argument I'm making. The Supreme Court had several procedural reasons for not granting Google's petition for certiorari: the Federal Circuit's decisions were not setting binding precedent outside of this particular case, and there were still issues to be decided by the lower courts that included avenues for Google to prevail, making it unnecessary for the Supreme Court to render a landmark decision on the matter of API copyright. If the appeals had gone to the Ninth Circuit, Google's appeal would have stood a much better chance than it did before the Federal Circuit. A Ninth Circuit decision in the matter would have set a very important precedent, but a decision in favor of Google would not have created any obvious circuit split and wouldn't have upset the status quo of the software industry. On the other hand, a decision in favor of Oracle would potentially have consequences serious enough to be a priority issue for the Supreme Court whether or not it created a circuit split.
- carussell 9y ago
  > A Ninth Circuit decision [...] in favor of Google would not have created any obvious circuit split and wouldn't have upset the status quo of the software industry. Go on, finish the thought, and make your conclusion explicit. Because by any reasonable reading, you're suggesting that the Supreme Court would not have granted Oracle's petition if Google prevailed in the Ninth Circuit. And yet you start by saying that this isn't your argument. Be explicit.

wtallis 9y ago

> To argue that the case would have stopped at the Ninth Circuit is to argue that because the Supreme Court denied Google's petition to reverse the Federal Circuit, then they would have denied Oracle's petition to reverse the Ninth Circuit. That's not the argument I'm making. The Supreme Court had several procedural reasons for not granting Google's petition for certiorari: the Federal Circuit's decisions were not setting binding precedent outside of this particular case, and there were still issues to be decided by the lower courts that included avenues for Google to prevail, making it unnecessary for the Supreme Court to render a landmark decision on the matter of API copyright. If the appeals had gone to the Ninth Circuit, Google's appeal would have stood a much better chance than it did before the Federal Circuit. A Ninth Circuit decision in the matter would have set a very important precedent, but a decision in favor of Google would not have created any obvious circuit split and wouldn't have upset the status quo of the software industry. On the other hand, a decision in favor of Oracle would potentially have consequences serious enough to be a priority issue for the Supreme Court whether or not it created a circuit split.

carussell 9y ago
> A Ninth Circuit decision [...] in favor of Google would not have created any obvious circuit split and wouldn't have upset the status quo of the software industry. Go on, finish the thought, and make your conclusion explicit. Because by any reasonable reading, you're suggesting that the Supreme Court would not have granted Oracle's petition if Google prevailed in the Ninth Circuit. And yet you start by saying that this isn't your argument. Be explicit.