Google feels they already complied, and documents have already been submitted per Apple's earlier requests. Apple now says that it's not enough and they want more, but the argument is that Apple is treating the new document requests as tho Google is a defendant and required to do so.
Why?
Because Samsung uses GOOGLE SEARCH to find relevant documents to hand over.
As Google are in control of Android they can change the names of things so they won't be found.
Why should Google be required to submit any documentation if they aren't being sued? If Apple feels it wants to go after Android itself then sue Google and let the discovery process do what it's intended to do. You wouldn't support Lodsys demanding iOS source-code to prove developers are using their IP in iOS apps would you? Heck I remember several posters here saying it wasn't fair for Samsung to demand iOS source-code in their Australia IP infringement lawsuit against Apple and Apple really was the defendant.
Why?
Because they are the SEARCH company used to FIND the things that the court demands.
Because they are the SEARCH company used to FIND the things that the court demands.
Conflict of interest much.
You clearly don't understand what's going on with the court case nor what Google is supposed to produce. Perhaps do a bit of reading and research as many of us have done before commenting, otherwise you confuse other readers with misinformation. It wasn't a web search Hill60.
In a nutshell Apple legal arguments convinced Judge Grewal that some information important to the Samsung case would need to come from Google themselves and Google was ordered to produce those pertinent docs. Apple says the number of documents produced was fewer than they had expected and questions the search terms and personnel used to satisfy the inquiry. Judge Grewal agreed that Apple was within it's rights to be more intimately informed about Google's methods and search terms used to help ensure the order was met. But in addition Apple has in the meantime requested another batch of documents which the court has yet to rule on.
Apple's obvious intent is to get as much information about Android as the court can be convinced to allow. It's partially a fishing expedition IMO. What Apple does not want to do is directly involve Google, a fact made clear in Apple's statement to the court on why Google should not be allowed to file an Amicus brief.
There's absolutely no indication that Apple wants a direct confrontation with them, and every indication they wish to avoid one. If Apple truly believes that Android is "stolen technology" they've had several years to take it to a court of law and put a stop to it. Heck if they had done so 5 years ago they could have potentially stopped the whole Android story before it ever gained traction. The fact they did not and have not should tell you something.
Comments
Surely you're being sarcastic. If not, try WebKit amongst other items.
I'd post this link to him but he's proven to be less than open to anything other than his preconceived falsehoods.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Google feels they already complied, and documents have already been submitted per Apple's earlier requests. Apple now says that it's not enough and they want more, but the argument is that Apple is treating the new document requests as tho Google is a defendant and required to do so.
Why?
Because Samsung uses GOOGLE SEARCH to find relevant documents to hand over.
As Google are in control of Android they can change the names of things so they won't be found.
Quit being disingenuous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Why should Google be required to submit any documentation if they aren't being sued? If Apple feels it wants to go after Android itself then sue Google and let the discovery process do what it's intended to do. You wouldn't support Lodsys demanding iOS source-code to prove developers are using their IP in iOS apps would you? Heck I remember several posters here saying it wasn't fair for Samsung to demand iOS source-code in their Australia IP infringement lawsuit against Apple and Apple really was the defendant.
Why?
Because they are the SEARCH company used to FIND the things that the court demands.
Conflict of interest much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyJedi
You need to document and be able to explain to the court where and how it was obtained.
How it is obtained is via a Google search, hence the requirement of their involvement.
E.g. "slide to unlock" becomes "swipe to unlock" and disappears from a search for slide.
Google is too closely involved.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
I'll try to reply to this, even though its just a bunch of words smashed together with little to no understanding of the actual concept involved.
Quote:
How it is obtained is via a Google search, hence the requirement of their involvement.
source.android.com isn't google search, its a source code repository. All of Android is contained within, no need to even ask to download it.
Quote:
E.g. "slide to unlock" becomes "swipe to unlock" and disappears from a search for slide.
.....no idea what this has to do with anything.
Quote:
Google is too closely involved.
Maybe they should sue google then, not a manufacturer
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Why?
Because they are the SEARCH company used to FIND the things that the court demands.
Conflict of interest much.
You clearly don't understand what's going on with the court case nor what Google is supposed to produce. Perhaps do a bit of reading and research as many of us have done before commenting, otherwise you confuse other readers with misinformation. It wasn't a web search Hill60.
In a nutshell Apple legal arguments convinced Judge Grewal that some information important to the Samsung case would need to come from Google themselves and Google was ordered to produce those pertinent docs. Apple says the number of documents produced was fewer than they had expected and questions the search terms and personnel used to satisfy the inquiry. Judge Grewal agreed that Apple was within it's rights to be more intimately informed about Google's methods and search terms used to help ensure the order was met. But in addition Apple has in the meantime requested another batch of documents which the court has yet to rule on.
Apple's obvious intent is to get as much information about Android as the court can be convinced to allow. It's partially a fishing expedition IMO. What Apple does not want to do is directly involve Google, a fact made clear in Apple's statement to the court on why Google should not be allowed to file an Amicus brief.
There's absolutely no indication that Apple wants a direct confrontation with them, and every indication they wish to avoid one. If Apple truly believes that Android is "stolen technology" they've had several years to take it to a court of law and put a stop to it. Heck if they had done so 5 years ago they could have potentially stopped the whole Android story before it ever gained traction. The fact they did not and have not should tell you something.
Could also be found through a Bing search.