ASDK vs ODA: The Judge's Comments

In reading transcripts posted by Owen Wengerd at adskvoda.com from the Autodesk vs Open Design Alliance hearings, the judge sounds like quite a character. Here are some of his comments:

"I never understood how you [lawyers] get six weeks [to prepare] and I get three days [to make a decision]."

"...using an affidavit is very efficient, because otherwise I have got to listen to it one question at a time. And I can guarantee you I can read faster than I can listen."

"Well, that doesn't answer the T in temporary restraining order."

"I would sure like ten days. You all spend six weeks writing me a brief and then I get 24 hours to try and absorb it. My clerks would appreciate it and I would appreciate it if you gave us at least ten days."

"Maybe because they [Autodesk] thought they had a judge that would be more persuaded by anecdotes than statistics."

ODA lawyer: "I'm sure you are familiar generally with --"
Judge: "You started to say, 'I'm sure you are familiar with.' I wouldn't necessarily make that assumption."

Autodesk lawyer: "I know your Honor had a fascinating unclean hands trademark case."
Judge: "It made the rounds, didn't it?
Autodesk lawyer: "I'll say it did."
Judge: "I was getting letters from judges all over the countries on that."

Unclean!

The legal maneuvering is now that the ODA accuses Autodesk of "unclean hands." ODA claims that Autodesk lacks empirical evidence showing DWG files created by non-Autodesk software are more unstable than DWG files created by AutoCAD. The onus is on Autodesk to come up with evidence that (1) satisfies the judge; and (2) was produced before Autodesk launched its legal action.

I can see that is will be an difficult problem. It would be easy for both sides to produce biased results, telling the judge, "See, our drawings are clean; it's the other one's drawings that crash." The bias could be either:

* Deliberate: We need to produce evidence that shows us in a perfect light and our opposition in utter darkness -- as Microsoft did, when they showed the court a doctored video.
* Course of nature: both sides have traditionally been interested primarily in damaged DWG files (to fix them or develop workarounds), and thus may be primarily in pocession of problem files.

I know that the IntelliCAD Technical Consortium has thousands of DWG files that it runs through IntelliCAD code to look for problems. These drawings may well have a neutral bias: these are everyday drawings that might (or might not) contain problems, I think. Does Autodesk have a similar neutral database?

Comments

[owenwengerd]

I may be wrong, but I think those are *her* comments. :)