4 ms·

This is a summary posted by Engadget. I thought it'd be more friendly than the full doc. Here's the link to the full document if anyone's interested: http://s

• acqq 16y ago
  And it's a response to this full document: http://regmedia.co.uk/2010/08/13/oracle_complaint_against_google.pdf http://regmedia.co.uk/2010/08/13/oracle_complaint_against_go...
• btilly 16y ago
  But the full document is unintentionally hilarious. The various invocations of Google is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of paragraph _, and therefore denies them. amused me greatly when I looked at what was denied. Similarly there was a lot of Google denies any remaining allegations of paragraph _. when every claim of that paragraph had been admitted.
  • joshstaiger 16y ago
    Not a lawyer, but knowingly infringing on a patent opens one to treble damages: http://www.patent-infringement.org/recover.html http://www.patent-infringement.org/recover.html So maybe it’s legal speak for “Regardless of what the patents say, we weren’t aware of them.”
    • btilly 16y ago
      You clearly did not compare the documents. Google denied statements such as that Oracle is a software company, is headquartered where it is headquartered, and denied that Oracle purchased Sun and owns the copyrights to Java. Worry about triple damages was not the reason.
      • joshstaiger 16y ago
        You’re right. My mistake.