[Info-vax] Trial Phase 2 (was Re: HP wins Oracle Itanium case)

[Keith Parris]

On 8/24/2012 11:54 PM, JF Mezei wrote:
> Ellison saw that HP was lying to customers about IA64 and tried to
> capitalise on that.

For Phase 2 of the trial, among the questions HP is asking be decided 
are (from the Joint Pre-Trial Conference Statement at 
http://www.scefiling.org/filingdocs/14200/54285/86807_JointxPTCxStatementxPhasex4.pdf):

"Defamation

• Were any of Oracle’s statements, that HP was not being truthful with 
its customers and that Itanium was approaching the end of its life, 
false and did Oracle know that such statements were false or have 
serious doubts about whether they were true?
• Did Oracle make the statements at issue to third parties, who 
reasonably would understand these statements to mean that HP was not 
being truthful with its customers or that Itanium was approaching the 
end of its life?
• Was HP harmed by the Oracle statements at issue and, if so, what would 
reasonably compensate HP for this harm?
• Did Oracle act with malice, oppression or fraud in making the 
statements at issue?"

I'm interested in seeing if the court chooses to address these questions 
in Phase 2, and the answers it finds.