Google files opening Supreme Court brief in Oracle v. Google copyright lawsuit • Hacker News Board

Re: Google files opening Supreme Court brief in Oracle v. Google copyright lawsuit

#11

Post by gpm » Tue, Jan 07, 2020, 4:36 AM UTC

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #5

This coming from the company that files patents like crazy and gives out t-shirts that say “patent heroes wanted”. Call me cynical but I feel like google is narrowly interested in open innovation when they are at risk for billions in fines, and definitely also supports openness in other ways, but still supports a lot of proprietary and closed source work. There are lots of business reasons to be closed source, but do…

This is coming from a whole lot more than just Google. They are the ones who will lose money in the immediate lawsuit, but we all stand to suffer if Oracle's interpretation of the law is held up. Don't take my word for it, take the word of the entire software community who has weighed in on this to support google in the form of amicus briefs (which I really do encourage you to read).

Here is a partial list of other groups who have already filed motions in support of Google: Microsoft, EFF, Python Software Foundation, Mozilla, RedHat, (see the docket for a complete list).

In addition their was a very interesting brief submitted by a bunch of famous computer scientists, instead of an organized company. The names attatched included Edwin Catmull, Alan Kay, Brian Kernighan, Bjarne Stroustrup, Andrew Tanenbaum, Ken Thompson, Guido van Rossum, Steve Wozniak. The total list of people is 78 long and they are all of similar caliber (though I did pick out the names I had the strongest recognition for), see their brief: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-956/89487/20190...)

This case isn't about Google making or loosing some money, Google being open or not. None of the amici care about that, the supreme court doesn't care about that. Only Google and Oracle care about that. This case is about the law that governs us all and what effects it has on us all.

And yes, Microsoft is agreeing with the EFF in a lawsuit...

Re: Google files opening Supreme Court brief in Oracle v. Google copyright lawsuit

#12

Post by jmspring » Tue, Jan 07, 2020, 4:37 AM UTC

Oracle is no saint, but Google isn't a saint in this either. Google is one of the strictest companies I've talked with when it comes to people working on personal projects, contributing to open source, etc. even when in California and on your own time/equipment.

Re: Google files opening Supreme Court brief in Oracle v. Google copyright lawsuit

#13

Post by CaliforniaKarl » Tue, Jan 07, 2020, 4:38 AM UTC

Who here remembers Groklaw? PJ was covering Oracle vs. Google with the same level of detail that she used on SCO vs. IBM. Coverage ran up into the first appeal, when she stopped updating the site.

• The list of all Oracle vs. Google filings (up to the site's closing), with links to articles that mention them. Not all filings had corresponding articles: http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=OracleGoog...

• The list of all articles related to Oracle vs. Google, in reverse-order (newest at the top): http://groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=archives&year=...

PJ, wherever you are, I hope you're doing well!

(Edited: Removed characters that messed up formatting)

Re: Google files opening Supreme Court brief in Oracle v. Google copyright lawsuit

#14

Post by throwawaymath » Tue, Jan 07, 2020, 4:40 AM UTC

What great PR speak. The core topic of the article is an update in the ongoing copyright legal dispute between Oracle and Google. But the title and opening paragraph invoke an ethos of justice, which inherently frames Google as a valiant champion defending freedoms for its users.

Re: Google files opening Supreme Court brief in Oracle v. Google copyright lawsuit

#15

Post by ethbro » Tue, Jan 07, 2020, 4:41 AM UTC

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #5

This coming from the company that files patents like crazy and gives out t-shirts that say “patent heroes wanted”. Call me cynical but I feel like google is narrowly interested in open innovation when they are at risk for billions in fines, and definitely also supports openness in other ways, but still supports a lot of proprietary and closed source work. There are lots of business reasons to be closed source, but do…

IMHO, one of the biggest benefits of Microsoft's recent friendliness towards open source has been providing Google competition for mindshare.

Both do amazing things with and for the open source community, but Google definitely got the benefit of being The large open source company.

More competition is heathier for the entire ecosystem. Especially when it spurs executive-level attention towards continued openness.

Re: Google files opening Supreme Court brief in Oracle v. Google copyright lawsuit

#16

Post by ethbro » Tue, Jan 07, 2020, 4:43 AM UTC

CaliforniaKarl wrote: post #13

Who here remembers Groklaw? PJ was covering Oracle vs. Google with the same level of detail that she used on SCO vs. IBM. Coverage ran up into the first appeal, when she stopped updating the site. • The list of all Oracle vs. Google filings (up to the site's closing), with links to articles that mention them. Not all filings had corresponding articles: http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=OracleGoog... •…

Stopped updating it for a reason -- http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20130818120421175

Re: Google files opening Supreme Court brief in Oracle v. Google copyright lawsuit

#17

Post by jborichevskiy » Tue, Jan 07, 2020, 4:45 AM UTC

zozbot234 wrote: post #10

jborichevskiy wrote: post #9

Google could lead by example here - perhaps by letting people download a reliable, usable copy of the data they're making 70 billion dollars a year from. But they won't even do that. https://beepb00p.xyz/takeout-data-gone.html

That blogpost is complaining that Google isn't keeping around as much data as OP would like. I mean, seriously? Damned if you do, damned if you don't?

Let's be real; it's not like your data is also purged from their predictive models when it's no longer available in Takeout. They'll still be using it for profit. The least they can do is let you download a copy of it.

Re: Google files opening Supreme Court brief in Oracle v. Google copyright lawsuit

#18

Post by ethbro » Tue, Jan 07, 2020, 4:49 AM UTC

gpm wrote: post #11

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #5

This coming from the company that files patents like crazy and gives out t-shirts that say “patent heroes wanted”. Call me cynical but I feel like google is narrowly interested in open innovation when they are at risk for billions in fines, and definitely also supports openness in other ways, but still supports a lot of proprietary and closed source work. There are lots of business reasons to be closed source, but do…

This is coming from a whole lot more than just Google. They are the ones who will lose money in the immediate lawsuit, but we all stand to suffer if Oracle's interpretation of the law is held up. Don't take my word for it, take the word of the entire software community who has weighed in on this to support google in the form of amicus briefs (which I really do encourage you to read). Here is a partial list of other g…

> This case isn't about Google making or loosing some money, Google being open or not. None of the amici care about that, the supreme court doesn't care about that. Only Google and Oracle care about that.

... I don't think there's much support here for Oracle winning on its claims.

But this particular subthread was pointing out the hypocrisy of Google trumpeting "Openness in all cases!"

These are two separate and unrelated topics. We can simultaneously support Google winning the case (for the outcome on case law) while also believing Google could be a better corporate steward of open source (mostly looking at you, Android).

Re: Google files opening Supreme Court brief in Oracle v. Google copyright lawsuit

#19

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, Jan 07, 2020, 4:57 AM UTC

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #5

This coming from the company that files patents like crazy and gives out t-shirts that say “patent heroes wanted”. Call me cynical but I feel like google is narrowly interested in open innovation when they are at risk for billions in fines, and definitely also supports openness in other ways, but still supports a lot of proprietary and closed source work. There are lots of business reasons to be closed source, but do…

> This coming from the company that files patents like crazy and gives out t-shirts that say “patent heroes wanted”

That's not incompatible with openness if they are largely amassing a defensive patent portfolio. A desire for openness does not mean unilateral disarmament in the face of enemies who are very willing to use every status quo legal tool to.prevent openness.

Re: Google files opening Supreme Court brief in Oracle v. Google copyright lawsuit

#20

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, Jan 07, 2020, 5:01 AM UTC

ronilan wrote: post #3

sarcasmatwork wrote: post #2

FYI: https://www.eff.org/cases/oracle-v-google

the lawsuit will now be known as Google v. Oracle, since Google asked the Supreme Court to hear the case. After nine years, we’ll have to get used to calling the case by this new name Interesting. Poetic. Google can’t win this fight (if they win) as a defendant, only as an aggressor.

> Google can’t win this fight (if they win) as a defendant

Sure they can (and it's the only way they can), if they win at the Supreme Court, it will be as a Defendant-Appellant. And if, as is often the case, the final formalization of the victory comes on remand back to the trial court from the Supreme Court after the Supreme Court declares the controlling law, that victory will be as a simple Defendant.