Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc.

Filing 1768

REQUEST RE CUSTOM DETAILS Replies due by 5/3/2016. Responses due by 5/2/2016.. Signed by Judge Alsup on 5/1/16. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/1/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 ORACLE AMERICA, INC., 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 12 13 No. C 10-03561 WHA Plaintiff, v. GOOGLE INC., 14 REQUEST RE “CUSTOM” DETAILS Defendant. / 15 16 With respect to “custom,” the Court understood open-source to still have licensing 17 restrictions, which included, if you downloaded the open-source code, (i) donating back to the 18 open-source public all improvements by the downloader, and (ii) not selling for profit your own 19 version of what you downloaded. Were these conditions part of the open-source custom or not? 20 If so, how does Google contend it complied with these conditions? Oracle will please address 21 these concerns in its “custom” response due MONDAY, and Google must answer specifically on 22 the above (and any other licensing bars raised by Oracle to any such custom) by TUESDAY AT 23 NOON. 24 25 26 27 28 Dated: May 1, 2016. WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?