Reply to post: Re: Excuse my lack of understanding ...

Word boffins back Rimini Street in Oracle row: 'Full' in 'full costs' is a 'delexicalised adjective'

Steve Knox

Re: Excuse my lack of understanding ...

Oracle is pushing for costs not normally considered in legal cases.

Take this example:

"Full time as in not half time?"

This question requires a specific quantity of time (you cannot assuredly have half of an indeterminate amount). That specific quantity would be "full time", and more than that would be "more than full time". For illustration, consider a standard working week in the US. Full time is normally 40 hours per week, half time 20 hours per week, and more than 40 would be "overtime." Oracle's interpretation of "full" in this context would allow up to 168 hours per week as "full time.", simply because that time exists within a week, even though it is not part of the customary definition.

Or take the "full parking lot" as one with no free parking spaces. Oracle's argument, essentially, would be that such a lot is NOT full because you CAN cram more cars into it (by filling up the driving lanes, stacking cars on top of each other, etc.) But such an interpretation would ruin the functional definition of a parking lot, being a place to temporarily place vehicles to be readily removed for use later.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019