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

Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 771 posts

Re: Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google

#121

Post by sterwill »

rdsnsca wrote: post #105
yencabulator wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not screw heads and threads, too? Apple wouldn't have to just use hard-to-find screwdrivers, they could just make a new screw shape, copyright the design, and then it'll be even harder to open their gadgets.

Actually screw heads are copyrighted, see : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_screw_drives#Robertson

Copyrights are not patents, and your link asserts that the Robertson screw design is patented, not copyrighted. The Google vs. Oracle case is about copyrights.

Re: Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google

#122

Post by sjg007 »

tjchear wrote: post #115
sjg007 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A better analogy for API would be an agreement on how to communicate what needs to be done (and what has been done) between two persons. Is that not what blueprints do?

Blueprint describes the thing that is to be built. API describes how two parties talk to each other. I'd say API is closer to a protocol or a contract than it is to architectural blueprint.

Well a blueprint communicates from the architect to the builder/carpenter/plumber etc...

Re: Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google

#123

Post by interestica »

Aqueous wrote: post #6

This might not just be a disaster for Google - it could be a disaster for software everywhere. If APIs become copyrightable, what happens to any open source software the implements a proprietary API? Supreme court judges just do not have the conceptual framework to properly adjudicate this. I don't think it's going to be possible to teach them the difference between interface and implementation within the parameters…

> Supreme court judges just do not have the conceptual framework to properly adjudicate this.

It's why silly (and inadequate) analogies emerge:

"Justice Clarence Thomas compared Google's copying of the Java APIs to a football team taking a rival's playbook."

Re: Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google

#124

Post by joshuamorton »

tsimionescu wrote: post #76
phkahler wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> If APIs become copyrightable, what happens to any open source software the implements a proprietary API? That has implications for language implementations too. Who would own the standard library for any given language? What about programs that call API functions? Are they derivative works too? An API is necessarily functional first and foremost. It would cause chaos and some weird dystopian future if Oracle wins.

The standard library is owned by the people creating it, and of course your work using the standard library is a derived work of that standard library. For example, glibc is owned by GNU, and it is licensed under the LGPL, so you are allowed to dynamically link it without having to release your own code under the GPL (or compatible). This is all happening today. The only projects that will be more seriously affected…

But now if I write my own libc implementation, someone (who?) could come after me for violating their copyright on the libc api.

Re: Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google

#127

Post by dmoy »

sterwill wrote: post #121
rdsnsca wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually screw heads are copyrighted, see : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_screw_drives#Robertson

Copyrights are not patents, and your link asserts that the Robertson screw design is patented, not copyrighted. The Google vs. Oracle case is about copyrights.

A relevant point here that patents expire in ~decade or two, whereas copyright expires when Disney tells you it can expire (which is never).

Not that expiring in a decade or two would help in the area of tech where stuff moves so fast.

Re: Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google

#128

Post by doesnotexist »

Should Oracle win this case, I predict that Free Software licenses will emerge as the clear market choice. Licenses that enshrine interoperability along with the freedom to modify or reimplement in part or wholesale will suddenly provide significantly more value over non-Free software which will be a proprietary minefield and the value will not be for technical but purely from legal liability. Anyone setting out to do something new would be wise to build on top of software they are at least assured will not be used against them in court should they find success building ontop of it.

Re: Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google

#129

Post by notsuoh »

jimbokun wrote: post #72
mathraki wrote: post #9

Where are the expert witnesses in this case?? Do we really expect judges in their 60s and 70s to understand basics of coding in order to come to the right conclusion?? I put myself in their shoes, if I had never looked at a line of code I couldn't even start to imagine what an API vs real code is. I'd probably think it's some made up concept that Google is using to save money and circumvent the law.

> Do we really expect judges in their 60s and 70s to understand basics of coding in order to come to the right conclusion?? Can substitute any field for "coding" above and come to the same conclusion. Quickly getting up to speed on the terminology and issues of fields in which they have no formal training or first hand experience is a big part of the job description of being a justice.

I don't think so, coding is so different than it has ever been, and is a different paradigm that most other things. Take farming, for example. Fundamentally farming is 100,000 years old. Getting up to speed on modern methods is just adding something else to the stack and, while complicated, those methods aren't totally foreign for someone who understands what farming is.

Something like coding is so alien to a 70-80 year old it's basically incomprehensible. That won't be the case with us in 50 years when were that age because we understand it, but there will probably be other things at that point that are equally incomprehensible.

Re: Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google

#130

Post by jrm4 »

doesnotexist wrote: post #128

Should Oracle win this case, I predict that Free Software licenses will emerge as the clear market choice. Licenses that enshrine interoperability along with the freedom to modify or reimplement in part or wholesale will suddenly provide significantly more value over non-Free software which will be a proprietary minefield and the value will not be for technical but purely from legal liability. Anyone setting out to d…

Glad to see this take, it was in line with what I was thinking. Namely, that APIs have always been an extremely poor excuse for true openness, more or less a way to get that half-freedom of "letting other people do your work for you" without always being required to give back.
Post reply on HN