Judge to Oracle: "proceed with caution before overreaching again"

Posted by grellas on Friday August 05, 2011 @04:54PM
from the patent-damages.com dept.

http://patent-damages.com/2011/08/oracle-v-google-ndca-judge-alsup-rejects-nash-bargaining-solution-and-grants-google%E2%80%99s-motion-to-exclude-oracle%E2%80%99s-expert%E2%80%99s-report-and-testimony-advocating-1-4b-to-6-1b-in-d/

( 15 comments | 59 points | on HN )

Re:Judge to Oracle: "proceed with caution before overreachin... by bjonathan on Friday August 05, 2011 @06:28PM (#2852052)

Website seems down, here is a cache version : http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:YkwoGRQ...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge to Oracle: "proceed with caution before overreachin... by div on Friday August 05, 2011 @05:54PM (#2851953)

It's refreshing to read about a judge giving a strong argumentation on a fairly technical subject.

If it comes to the point where Oracle will have to show which patents are being infringed, I wonder how they will hold up under the light of scrutiny.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge to Oracle: "proceed with caution before overreachin... by sigzero on Friday August 05, 2011 @06:15PM (#2852012)

I would imagine pretty good or Oracle wouldn't have brought suit.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge to Oracle: "proceed with caution before overreachin... by lambda_cube on Friday August 05, 2011 @07:06PM (#2852171)

You mean like when SCO sued IBM? If SCO didn't have a case they wouldn't have brought suit, right?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge to Oracle: "proceed with caution before overreachin... by wnoise on Friday August 05, 2011 @06:40PM (#2852100)

Oy. Every single allocation of surplus is Pareto efficient, and every single allocation can result from the right Nash equilibrium. The 50/50 split of surplus is in no way anymore justified then any other. You have to reach outside game theory for that.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge to Oracle: "proceed with caution before overreachin... by jigs_up on Friday August 05, 2011 @07:41PM (#2852265)

if you're going to speak on complex law issues, how about learning the difference between then and than?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge to Oracle: "proceed with caution before overreachin... by Natsu on Saturday August 06, 2011 @12:51AM (#2853055)

The grandparent post's statements were related to game theory (the branch of mathematics), not law.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge to Oracle: "proceed with caution before overreachin... by rjbond3rd on Friday August 05, 2011 @08:32PM (#2852390)

Then it's fair game to say you should have an apostrophe after "jig."

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge to Oracle: "proceed with caution before overreachin... by JVerstry on Friday August 05, 2011 @06:22PM (#2852035)

"(...) Oracle must be aware that some of the unaddressed criticisms seem, at least on one reading, to have merit, so it should proceed with caution (...)" - It's with judges like these that we could sort the patent mess.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge to Oracle: "proceed with caution before overreachin... by nkassis on Friday August 05, 2011 @06:12PM (#2852009)

Between 1.4 and 6.1B. That shows Oracle only valued sun for it patents it could use against people like Google (they paid 8B for sun)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge to Oracle: "proceed with caution before overreachin... by eric-hu on Friday August 05, 2011 @07:16PM (#2852197)

The lawyers that come up with these sums don't need a sense of money grounded in the real world. See also: RIAA wants 75 trillion from limewire: http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1202486102650

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge to Oracle: "proceed with caution before overreachin... by nextparadigms on Friday August 05, 2011 @08:03PM (#2852331)

I wonder if it sounds ridiculous even to them, or they actually believe their own claims.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge to Oracle: "proceed with caution before overreachin... by pyre on Saturday August 06, 2011 @05:46AM (#2853518)

Probably more like a negotiating tactic. The more that they ask for the more the actual amount awarded will be.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge to Oracle: "proceed with caution before overreachin... by rwolf on Friday August 05, 2011 @06:43PM (#2852108)

To be fair, maybe they just wanted to strangle a bunch of popular open source projects. Seeing the life go out of the eyes of Hudson might have been worth a lot of scratch :)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge to Oracle: "proceed with caution before overreachin... by NHQ on Saturday August 06, 2011 @04:30AM (#2853412)

The goal of bargaining is not usually to give the other party the best possible (most profitable) outcome. Does this Nash BS take into account for the bargainers that an agreement not reached will favor neither, or perhaps favor one less than the other. One party says to the other "your math is hogwater, no deal! We'll still build it some other way, but you won't get anything." Leverage is a simple machine.

[ Parent | on HN ]