Also, for some context (via http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2012050909451990 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2012050909451990) > Google has f

Also, for some context (via http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2012050909451990 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2012050909451990) > Google has filed a motion [PDF] for a new trial on both question 1a and 1b, arguing that they are indivisible and that Google has rights under the Seventh Amendment for a new trial on both sides of that same coin: >> "Under settled Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit law, the jury's failure to reach a verdict concerning both halves of this indivisible question requires a new trial concerning both questions. To accept the infringement verdict as binding on the parties and retry only fair use would violate both the unanimity requirement and the Reexamination Clause of the Seventh Amendment."