3 ms·

cherry picked or not and regardless of your opinion of Florian Mueller, that admission is important and pretty damning. Considering this guy used to work at Sun

by chugger 15y ago

cherry picked or not and regardless of your opinion of Florian Mueller, that admission is important and pretty damning. Considering this guy used to work at Sun and is supposed to be Google's Chief Java Architect.

0x12 15y ago
He wrote the original. It's not as if this is some guy that went and copied SUN code wholesale and it's not as if we're talking about the core of android here, it's 9 lines. Ok, damages: $500 should do it, and that's probably an overestimation. If there is wholesale copyright infringement I'm sure we'll get to it but this particular instance is hardly reason for a general alert.
- chugger 15y ago
  I think this strengthen's Oracle's case against Google. and it shows willful infringement on the part of Google. if you consider this admission together with the other evidence against Google, it's pretty damning. an October 2005 email written by Andy Rubin, Google’s senior VP of mobile, concerning Sun, which held the patents at issue here before being acquired by Oracle. “If Sun doesn’t want to work with us, we have two options: 1) Abandon our work and adopt MSFT CLR VM and C# language – or – 2) Do Java anyway and defend our decision, perhaps making enemies along the way.” The second, this email from Google engineer Tim Lindholm (who was previously a senior Java engineer at Sun) to Rubin in August of 2010: “What we’ve actually been asked to do (by Larry and Sergey) is to investigate what technical alternatives exist to Java for Android and Chrome. We’ve been over a bunch of these, and think they all suck. We conclude that we need to negotiate a license for Java under the terms we need.” even the Judge agrees. As Alsup told Oracle’s attorneys moments after reading it in open court, “That’s a pretty good document for you. That ought to be … big for you at the trial.” Indeed — particularly if Rubin has to explain it on the stand. “You know what they used to say about Joe Alioto,” Alsup said, referring to the successful antitrust attorney. “In a big case like this, he only needed two documents: He needed a document like this, the one I just read, and the Magna Carta. And he won every case. And you are going to be on the losing end of this document with Andy Rubin on the stand. … If willful infringement is found, there are profound implications for a permanent injunction. So you better think about that.” http://allthingsd.com/20110727/old-email-may-bite-google-in-java-patent-suit/ http://allthingsd.com/20110727/old-email-may-bite-google-in-...

by chugger 15y ago

0x12 15y ago

He wrote the original. It's not as if this is some guy that went and copied SUN code wholesale and it's not as if we're talking about the core of android here, it's 9 lines. Ok, damages: $500 should do it, and that's probably an overestimation. If there is wholesale copyright infringement I'm sure we'll get to it but this particular instance is hardly reason for a general alert.

chugger 15y ago
I think this strengthen's Oracle's case against Google. and it shows willful infringement on the part of Google. if you consider this admission together with the other evidence against Google, it's pretty damning. an October 2005 email written by Andy Rubin, Google’s senior VP of mobile, concerning Sun, which held the patents at issue here before being acquired by Oracle. “If Sun doesn’t want to work with us, we have two options: 1) Abandon our work and adopt MSFT CLR VM and C# language – or – 2) Do Java anyway and defend our decision, perhaps making enemies along the way.” The second, this email from Google engineer Tim Lindholm (who was previously a senior Java engineer at Sun) to Rubin in August of 2010: “What we’ve actually been asked to do (by Larry and Sergey) is to investigate what technical alternatives exist to Java for Android and Chrome. We’ve been over a bunch of these, and think they all suck. We conclude that we need to negotiate a license for Java under the terms we need.” even the Judge agrees. As Alsup told Oracle’s attorneys moments after reading it in open court, “That’s a pretty good document for you. That ought to be … big for you at the trial.” Indeed — particularly if Rubin has to explain it on the stand. “You know what they used to say about Joe Alioto,” Alsup said, referring to the successful antitrust attorney. “In a big case like this, he only needed two documents: He needed a document like this, the one I just read, and the Magna Carta. And he won every case. And you are going to be on the losing end of this document with Andy Rubin on the stand. … If willful infringement is found, there are profound implications for a permanent injunction. So you better think about that.” http://allthingsd.com/20110727/old-email-may-bite-google-in-java-patent-suit/ http://allthingsd.com/20110727/old-email-may-bite-google-in-...