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

Google and Oracle's decade-long copyright battle reaches Supreme Court

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 433 posts

Re: Google and Oracle's decade-long copyright battle reaches Supreme Court

#291

Post by mehrdadn »

getpolarized wrote: post #287
jasode wrote: post #49

>This is a complete dramatization. Are you copying 10k lines of code from a licensed code base into your project without permission and using it in your commercial product? To point back to the substance of the thread and Oracle's claims... Google didn't copy any of Oracle/Sun's Java source code base into Android Java. Oracle lawyers acknowledge this. Instead, Google copied the API of function name spellings and also…

Here's a good analogy for non-programers. You're building a new car company. You see all the existing cars, the roads, and the garages. So you measure the width of the car and the garage and you decide that the car should be exactly 6' wide. Then you ship your car. Enjoy 15 years of market success. Then you find that Oracle created the first cars and says they have copyright on the width of your car. That's how stupi…

I don't think that's a good analogy at all. A car's precise width is not part of its interface nor a part of its design anyone particularly cares about. Its interface is more like, the design of the UX... how the steering wheel, dashboard, etc. look and feel. If a company copied those but changed everything underneath so that people could buy a cheaper alternative without seeing a difference on their usage... I don't know, is that actually legal?

Re: Google and Oracle's decade-long copyright battle reaches Supreme Court

#292

Post by hashtagmarkup »

getpolarized wrote: post #287
jasode wrote: post #49

>This is a complete dramatization. Are you copying 10k lines of code from a licensed code base into your project without permission and using it in your commercial product? To point back to the substance of the thread and Oracle's claims... Google didn't copy any of Oracle/Sun's Java source code base into Android Java. Oracle lawyers acknowledge this. Instead, Google copied the API of function name spellings and also…

Here's a good analogy for non-programers. You're building a new car company. You see all the existing cars, the roads, and the garages. So you measure the width of the car and the garage and you decide that the car should be exactly 6' wide. Then you ship your car. Enjoy 15 years of market success. Then you find that Oracle created the first cars and says they have copyright on the width of your car. That's how stupi…

What if Google copied the name of Oracle's car and stamped it on the back? What if Google also copied the name of the in-car entertainment system and put all the buttons in the same place and stamped the same name on the dash? What if the shape of the car was exactly the same, and was only available in the exact same colors as Oracle's car? What if Google opened a car dealership next door to every single Oracle dealership with giant signs that said their cars are effectively interchangeable?

That's how stupid car analogies are...

Re: Google and Oracle's decade-long copyright battle reaches Supreme Court

#293

Post by iso8859-1 »

webmaven wrote: post #204
op03 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not if you marry another lawyer.

Generally speaking, you have to divorce the first one before you marry the second.

Not if they are marriages in separate jurisdictions.

Re: Google and Oracle's decade-long copyright battle reaches Supreme Court

#294

Post by throwaway373438 »

mehrdadn wrote: post #291
getpolarized wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a good analogy for non-programers. You're building a new car company. You see all the existing cars, the roads, and the garages. So you measure the width of the car and the garage and you decide that the car should be exactly 6' wide. Then you ship your car. Enjoy 15 years of market success. Then you find that Oracle created the first cars and says they have copyright on the width of your car. That's how stupi…

I don't think that's a good analogy at all. A car's precise width is not part of its interface nor a part of its design anyone particularly cares about. Its interface is more like, the design of the UX... how the steering wheel, dashboard, etc. look and feel. If a company copied those but changed everything underneath so that people could buy a cheaper alternative without seeing a difference on their usage... I don't…

The car's width is absolutely its interface with respect to roadway interoperability.

We aren't talking about user interfaces here. This lawsuit does not involve UX. We are talking about interfaces between functional components. The analogy is spot on.

Re: Google and Oracle's decade-long copyright battle reaches Supreme Court

#295

Post by mehrdadn »

throwaway373438 wrote: post #294
mehrdadn wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's a good analogy at all. A car's precise width is not part of its interface nor a part of its design anyone particularly cares about. Its interface is more like, the design of the UX... how the steering wheel, dashboard, etc. look and feel. If a company copied those but changed everything underneath so that people could buy a cheaper alternative without seeing a difference on their usage... I don't…

The car's width is absolutely its interface with respect to roadway interoperability. We aren't talking about user interfaces here. This lawsuit does not involve UX. We are talking about interfaces between functional components. The analogy is spot on.

The interoperability width is already set by the road... you're copying the road at that point, not the car.

The lawsuit involves UX for a software framework. Which its API constitutes. The user happens to be a developer here and their usage is software development.

Re: Google and Oracle's decade-long copyright battle reaches Supreme Court

#296

Post by animationwill »

mehrdadn wrote: post #291
getpolarized wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a good analogy for non-programers. You're building a new car company. You see all the existing cars, the roads, and the garages. So you measure the width of the car and the garage and you decide that the car should be exactly 6' wide. Then you ship your car. Enjoy 15 years of market success. Then you find that Oracle created the first cars and says they have copyright on the width of your car. That's how stupi…

I don't think that's a good analogy at all. A car's precise width is not part of its interface nor a part of its design anyone particularly cares about. Its interface is more like, the design of the UX... how the steering wheel, dashboard, etc. look and feel. If a company copied those but changed everything underneath so that people could buy a cheaper alternative without seeing a difference on their usage... I don't…

> A car's width is not its interface.

Let's improve the analogy!

My proposal => that you chose to make the door handles six inches because of UX, and Oracle showed up and said they made theirs six inches before you did.

Re: Google and Oracle's decade-long copyright battle reaches Supreme Court

#297

Post by throwaway373438 »

mehrdadn wrote: post #295
throwaway373438 wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The car's width is absolutely its interface with respect to roadway interoperability. We aren't talking about user interfaces here. This lawsuit does not involve UX. We are talking about interfaces between functional components. The analogy is spot on.

The interoperability width is already set by the road... you're copying the road at that point, not the car. The lawsuit involves UX for a software framework. Which its API constitutes. The user happens to be a developer here and their usage is software development.

And this is why Google had to copy the interface -- otherwise their runtime would not operate with other existing products. As you can see given your example, the analogy is a perfect fit.

Your argument that the copying is once-removed is unfortunately irrelevant to copyright law.

Re: Google and Oracle's decade-long copyright battle reaches Supreme Court

#298

Post by mehrdadn »

throwaway373438 wrote: post #297
mehrdadn wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The interoperability width is already set by the road... you're copying the road at that point, not the car. The lawsuit involves UX for a software framework. Which its API constitutes. The user happens to be a developer here and their usage is software development.

And this is why Google had to copy the interface -- otherwise their runtime would not operate with other existing products. As you can see given your example, the analogy is a perfect fit. Your argument that the copying is once-removed is unfortunately irrelevant to copyright law.

You're saying a car that's 1 inch narrower somehow wouldn't fit the same roads?

Re: Google and Oracle's decade-long copyright battle reaches Supreme Court

#299

Post by mehrdadn »

animationwill wrote: post #296
mehrdadn wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's a good analogy at all. A car's precise width is not part of its interface nor a part of its design anyone particularly cares about. Its interface is more like, the design of the UX... how the steering wheel, dashboard, etc. look and feel. If a company copied those but changed everything underneath so that people could buy a cheaper alternative without seeing a difference on their usage... I don't…

> A car's width is not its interface. Let's improve the analogy! My proposal => that you chose to make the door handles six inches because of UX, and Oracle showed up and said they made theirs six inches before you did.

You can't seriously suggest copying the width of 1 door handle is equivalent to copying all of the Java API, right? I don't think if Google provided an alternative for 1 function it would be in this lawsuit. Your analogy is just a tiny portion of the alternative I already portrayed: they copied the entire structure of the framework. Copy 1 door handle, 1 steering wheel, 1 precise dashboard design, 1 glove compartment, etc. and I feel your analogy would result in a lawsuit just the same?

(For reference none of this is meant to reflect my position on what the law actually is, or should be. I'm just considering analogies here.)

Re: Google and Oracle's decade-long copyright battle reaches Supreme Court

#300

Post by treis »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #280
treis wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If I'm understanding your argument, if Google independently developed a programming language, and then they implemented a compatibility layer that accepted Java bytecode invoking Java APIs and translated it in realtime to their not-Java programming language, then this would be okay? Yes >How would such a programming language be detectably different from being an implementation of Java? It would have it's own unique…

This doesnt make sence - you jyst replaced the textual API used at compiletime with a binary API used at runtime. Its literally same difference.

They're clearly different.

In this example Google independently developed a language and made it compatible with the JVM.

In the real world Google wanted Java and didn't like the licensing terms. So they copied the Java API and from that starting point built out their own version of Java.

Post reply on HN