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 t

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-...