Google Developer Testifies That Java Memo Was Misinterpreted

benfrog writes with a piece that appeared in yesterday's Wall Street Journal about the in-progress legal battle between Oracle and Google over Java: "Ex-Sun and current Google employee Tim Lindholm testified that it was "not what he meant" when asked about the smoking gun email (included here (PDF)) that essentially said that Google needed to get a license for Java because all the alternatives 'suck[ed].' He went on in 'brief but tense testimony' to claim that his day-to-day involvement with Android was limited."

Comments

Most vital lesson learnt: Hire the right person

[Taco Cowboy]

If there is any lesson to be learnt from this trial it gonna be this - Hire the right person

This Mr. Lindholm is definitely NOT the type of person I would hire

I've been in the software/hardware development for decades, and never have I write any email or any message in any forum, or in any conversation in any formal setting that I will say things like what Mr. Lindholm has said

The tech world as we are now is not only filled with geeks, but with lawyers

Those lawyers will use WHATEVER we wrote or said to get their point across - even to the point of mis-interpret what we wrote / say

How can an ex-Sun employee, currently employed by Google, write an email saying things like "Google need a license for Java" ?

I mean, what qualification that Mr. Lindholm has on legal stuffs ?

If I am working for the human resource department of Google, I will fire that Mr. Lindholm long ago - and I ain't gonna tolerate any of my employee doing things similar to what Mr. Lindholm has done