Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 116 posts

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

#51

Post by pjmlp »

First Google should provide the Java community an platform that actually supports Java language alongside its standard library instead of Google's version of J++, just like the NDK supports C and C++ standard library.

None of the other Java vendors has ever had any problem with either Sun or Oracle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Java_virtual_machines

Or just like with Microsoft with J++, they can create their own .NET aka Android with either pure Kotlin/Native or Dart and see how successful it will turn out to be without piggybacking into the Java eco-system (Fuchsia).

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

#52

Post by macspoofing »

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”.

This is a complete red-herring. Patents are not what this case is about. Openness or cuddliness is not what this case is about.

The reality is that Google is in the right because Oracle is willing to set fire to the norms and standards that were developed over the last 50 years just because they want to squeeze more money out of Java.

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

#53

Post by svat »

jborichevskiy wrote: post #17
zozbot234 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Yes your data is purged when you delete it from your activity (https://myactivity.google.com/) (not instantly because there are many systems involved, but within a strict deadline). This is taken seriously, and there are teams at Google making sure this happens. (Not sure how much is public, but some details in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19809259) (Note that anonymized data, such as aggregate data that cannot possibly be used to identify individual users, cannot be deleted this way: e.g. (say) the number of YouTube views for "Despacito" (if you had watched it) will not decrease by 1 when you delete your activity, because that number was never associated with you in the first place.)

If something used to be in your Takeout data but is no longer there, that's most likely because Google no longer has that data about you.

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

#54

Post by throwawaymath »

dodobirdlord wrote: post #22
throwawaymath wrote: post #14

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.

In fairness, they are. The entire industry sans Oracle is against Oracle on this one. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-956/89487/20190...

Sure, but that's not really my point. I don't really care about Google or Oracle here. I'm saying that Google is spinning it really well, regardless of whether the spin is justified, so that the framing of their position is more interesting than just "Google v Oracle update."

That's a really effective framing for any company in a highly publicized legal dispute. If it happens to be true for Google in this particular dispute, that's nice but not necessary for the PR speak to be advantageous.

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

#55

Post by jborichevskiy »

svat wrote: post #53
jborichevskiy wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Yes your data is purged when you delete it from your activity ( https://myactivity.google.com/ ) (not instantly because there are many systems involved, but within a strict deadline). This is taken seriously, and there are teams at Google making sure this happens. (Not sure how much is public, but some details in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19809259 ) (Note that anonymized data, such as aggregat…

Well, today I learned. Thanks for the thorough explanation.

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

#56

Post by bjornsing »

gpm wrote: post #47
bjornsing wrote: post #42

If software interfaces can’t be copyrighted, how come CPU ISAs can...? Anybody know?

How come you assume they can be? My understanding is that they have generally been protected by patent but I'm open to being proven wrong (preferably by being shown a court case, but being shown big licensing agreements for copyright would also be interesting).

I’ve just assumed it so because I’ve read it a few times in various contexts, but now that I google it more thoroughly it looks very much like you’re right.

Perhaps this confusion stems from the fact that chip companies tend to license the ISA bundled with documentation and software tools, which are of course covered by copyright (see e.g. the MIPS Open license).

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

#58

Post by snarf21 »

macspoofing wrote: post #52
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”. This is a complete red-herring. Patents are not what this case is about. Openness or cuddliness is not what this case is about. The reality is that Google is in the right because Oracle is willing to set fire to the norms and standards that were developed over the last 50 years just because they want to…

You can say it even more strongly. Oracle bought SUN with the sole intention of using it as the basis to sue Google. Full stop. This is a shakedown and Oracle needs to go away.

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

#60

Post by jcranmer »

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... •…

SCOTUSblog has its case page for Oracle v Google here: https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/google-llc-v-ora...

At a minimum, it will cover the briefs of both sides, and maybe some amici briefs, in an argument preview; then a summary of the oral argument in an argument analysis; and then a final summary of the ruling in an opinion analysis.

Post reply on HN