If (Google Violated Copyright) = False THEN Google Not Guilty
If Google has Fair Use THEN Google Not Guilty
Google Guilty
The judge needs to rule on the first statement, the jury came back on the second statement, but the jury could not decide on the third statement.
(Edit: Wording)
optimized (and corrected, because in your flow Google is always guilty since everything drops through to that anyway).
In the sense that false short-circuits anything to the right, and ApiCopyrightable is only a factor if Google is held to have violated copyright under the assumption that Apis can be copyrighted.
:)
GoogleGuilty := ...GoogleGuilty = APICopyrightable and GoogleViolatedCopyright and not GoogleHasFairUse
Quickly scanning over the C-like syntax I can more easily notice the ! and the && than I can make out the 'not' and the 'and' while scanning the more natural-language-like CoffeeScript because of the clear separation between ! and && and the alphanumerics commonly used in variable names. IMO the 'and' and 'not' keywords kind of get lost in the noise of all the other characters.
YMMV here. I've been programming in C-like languages for quite a long time so maybe that's rewired my brain in a way that doesn't hold for people who don't program in C-like languages.
The law tends to be framed in conditions like this. That's why "the jury found X" isn't necessarily news--the real story could be in other parts of the conditional expression.