Will this push Google to move towards dart lang even more now?
Wouldn’t Kotlin be the more logical route?
But isnt that based on Java again?
Oracle Wins Revival of Billion-Dollar Case Against Google
181–190 of 643 posts
Re: Oracle Wins Revival of Billion-Dollar Case Against Google
#182I'm conflicted on this. A. I don't like that APIs are copywrite-able. B. I wish Google complied with the GPL anyway. I hate this anti-GPL sentiment that has been going around the last 10 years or so. C. The android play store would probably go through a renaissance if all the apps had to be rewritten. D. I don't trust Google, but I really really really don't like Oracle.
[deleted]
Re: Oracle Wins Revival of Billion-Dollar Case Against Google
#183I'm conflicted on this. A. I don't like that APIs are copywrite-able. B. I wish Google complied with the GPL anyway. I hate this anti-GPL sentiment that has been going around the last 10 years or so. C. The android play store would probably go through a renaissance if all the apps had to be rewritten. D. I don't trust Google, but I really really really don't like Oracle.
B. Java is not licensed under the GPL.
C. Not going to happen.
Re: Oracle Wins Revival of Billion-Dollar Case Against Google
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get why it's a scary issue or even controversial why an API would be subject copyright. An API, in my mind, is similar to design drawings or blueprints. Independently figuring out how to implement those drawings doesn't change the fact that you copied the design.
To me it's more like copyrighting the standard height of a door.
The Java API is hundreds of classes and thousands of methods. It is far beyond something as simple as the height of a door.
Re: Oracle Wins Revival of Billion-Dollar Case Against Google
#185I’m not sure if I have the timeline correct but I thought Java was owned by Sun Microsystems at the time when they made these decisions. I’m sure they rightly assumed Sun Microsystems would never do this. It is sad to see what Oracle is doing with Sun Microsystem’s creation.
Well, one could argue that, had Google paid for the license, Sun wouldn't have been bought by Oracle.
Re: Oracle Wins Revival of Billion-Dollar Case Against Google
#186I think the part that gets lost in all of this is that Sun offered to license Java to Google previously for $100M. [1] Google turned that down and bypassed Sun because they didn't want to pay (or license). At the time, Sun was happy to see Java being used by Google, even without the license. Still, Google knew exactly what they were doing. [2] My point is, they did this to themselves and they knew what they were poss…
When Google did that, Google was relying on controlling precedents in the 9th circuit saying that APIs are functional elements needed for interoperability and therefore are not copyrightable. The first judge that they saw agreed with them and it should have been an open and shut case.
It was Google's misfortune that through a quirk of the system the case wound up in the Federal Circuit, which has a history of creatively ignoring precedent to fashion new precedent that increases its own importance. (Which is how we have patents on all sorts of crap that the Supreme Court has ruled that we shouldn't.) And it was good lawyering on Oracle's part to throw every possible argument at the case, including the copyright arguments that they knew they should have lost.
Re: Oracle Wins Revival of Billion-Dollar Case Against Google
#187Earlier quoted context omitted.
They did appeal, and the Supreme Court pretty much said they didn't want to look at this until a trial took place on the fair use question. Now that that's happened, I assume there will be another appeal to the Supreme Court.
I sure hope so. That decision definitely needs to be appealed. I very much hope it's overturned. (The industry has pretty much assumed - and acted - that APIs were not copyrightable, and that's worked out all right. Suddenly shifting to APIs being copyrightable is going to cause some change the rules under existing activity, in ways that it's hard yet to define the full scope of.) But even if it's not, the decision n…
Didn't White House administration try to interfere with this case, and persuade judges not to declare APIs non copyrightable? That was really weird.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/05/white-house-side...
I wonder what will happen this time.
Re: Oracle Wins Revival of Billion-Dollar Case Against Google
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unpopular opinion: I feel Google should be punished for what they did to Java. Maybe the mechanism being used is wrong, but Android bastardized Java and as an Android developer I feel real damage has been done to the health of the Java ecosystem by having billions of devices run fragmented Java-but-not-Java. Google has started to make it right with the switch to openJDK and Desugar, but in a lot of ways it’s too litt…
> real damage has been done to the health of the Java ecosystem by having billions of devices run fragmented Java-but-not-Java Even 100% running with that, damaging an ecosystem isn't against the law. You could argue that Google damaged the Erlang ecosystem by not basing Android on Erlang. Ecosystems compete with each other all the time, and it's hard for one to grow without damaging another.
I didn’t say it’s against the law, or imply it. If anything I implied the opposite with the comment about the wrong mechanism.
Actually my mistake, I assumed that you mean copyright, if you mean all laws in general, I feel there’s probably a way for Oracle to litigate, similar to how J++ went down
Re: Oracle Wins Revival of Billion-Dollar Case Against Google
#189I’m not sure if I have the timeline correct but I thought Java was owned by Sun Microsystems at the time when they made these decisions. I’m sure they rightly assumed Sun Microsystems would never do this. It is sad to see what Oracle is doing with Sun Microsystem’s creation.
The following is the fun history: - Java is created / owned by Sun. - Sun was fearful of MS's EEE approach (embrace, extend, exterminate) where MS took a thing, built their own, pushed their own tooling, added their own proprietary instruction, boom windows lock-in. So Sun basically made their contract: Java is free but only if you DO NOT introduce any new instructions, and implement a 100% compatible VM, nothing add…
And given the paltry sum of the Sun acquisition, this is the M&A miss-of-the-decade for Google's M&A group.
Re: Oracle Wins Revival of Billion-Dollar Case Against Google
#190How about we stop using Java. It's a terrible language anyways.