Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe just in the USA. But also Microsoft is on Google's side here. Also doesn't Microsoft's WSL also have this problem as a "reverse WINE" ?
Except Linux is FOSS so Microsoft has a license to do it.
Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google
261–270 of 771 posts
Re: Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google
#262Earlier quoted context omitted.
What really sucks is this was a perfect time for a lawyer to use Justice Thomas' analogy to better explain the difference. I would have tried something like: "Close your honor, but let me expand on this further. Imagine instead that your opponent publishes their calls and they are regularly available to all individuals of the general public. However, while they may describe a call for going long, they do not give any…
I think the playbook is just a bad analogy because it misses that point of what an interface is. It's the means of connecting two dissimilar mechanisms. A translation layer. I'd have argued it's more like copyrighting doorknob placement (opposite hinge, at hand height) and operation (twisting) on doors vs. patenting a novel mechanism inside the doorknob. A football playbook is more like the blueprints of the inside o…
Everybody loses: manufacturers, because they can't easily create competing products, and users, because they have to re-learn driving every time they change car brand.
Re: Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google
#263I'm not sure why so many people here seem to be surprised by this, I got the exact same impression from the hearing. The problem for Google on the copyrightability front is that "compilations" of non-copyrightable items can be copyrightable even if the underlying items themselves are not, if the "selection, coordination, or arrangement" of those items involves sufficient creativity to be considered an "original work…
I wouldn’t be surprised if Oracle wins on copyright (I think it is almost impossible for Google to count to 5 on their merger doctrine argument) but I disagree that fair use is a long shot. The justices that brought up the case’s procedural history were all unanimously skeptical that the Federal Circuit correctly set aside the fair use verdict in favor of Google. I think the most likely outcome of this case (especial…
I think that's somewhat unlikely; I think its somewhat more likely that the court concludes that the Federal Circuit erred in using de novo review, but instead of remanding to the Federal Circuit for reasonableness review reconsiders the jury verdict on the bases of the trial record itself (especially if by doing so it can uphold the trial verdict and kick the copyrightability issue down the road to another case.)
While the Supreme Court will dodge hard issues where it can, it doesn't tend to do it in a way which leaves a good chance that the same issue will come to them again in the same case. When they dodge, they like to make sure the issue stays dodged, at least for the immediate case. There's way too much risk that the Federal Circuit would reach the same answer if told to use a reasonableness standard of review (I don't think it should, but absent reaching the answer itself, the Supreme Court can't be sure of that), which would leave the copyrightability issue to come before the Court again before this case would be finalized.
Re: Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm no expert on RBG, but I always pegged her as a Neo-Lib, rather than a Leftist.
Sure- but then you have to be careful defining labels. Trying to peg a generic one dimensional (left-right) or even two dimensional (social/fiscal) political position on justices is difficult, even with loosely defined labels/ categories. It's much easier to look at justices relative position/ rank on a per-topic basis. Alternatively, and less useful to the general public, but very useful to SCOTUS junkies, is lookin…
Re: Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google
#265This is not good...not good at all! If Oracle wins, to me with zero knowledge around copyright laws and legalese topics, means small to medium companies will close down out of fear of getting sued for using or implementing a competitor's APIs. Not only that, it feels like the whole technological "civilization" will collapse after this and I'm not exaggerating, because thousands of people will lose their job simply be…
Well, the decision is binding on the US only so this is an exaggeration.
Re: Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google
#266This is the thing that really bothers me [from a comment in the post]: > 2) Also realize that the SCOTUS' job is not to decide what's right, but to decide what's legal given the constraints and allowances of both the Constitution and law. Even if a Justice were to feel like copywriting APIs would have terrible knock-on effects, she would be compelled to rule in favor of granting them if she believed that the laws pas…
As someone else in the comments said, I'm on Google's side here on the basis of this being the general industry assumption for a long time and interoperability generally being a good thing. On the other hand, does anyone here honestly believe that a complex API some team spent a lot of time designing isn't really a creative work?
Re: Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google
#267Absolute lunacy.
Re: Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google
#268I'm not sure why so many people here seem to be surprised by this, I got the exact same impression from the hearing. The problem for Google on the copyrightability front is that "compilations" of non-copyrightable items can be copyrightable even if the underlying items themselves are not, if the "selection, coordination, or arrangement" of those items involves sufficient creativity to be considered an "original work…
Re: Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google
#269I'm not sure why so many people here seem to be surprised by this, I got the exact same impression from the hearing. The problem for Google on the copyrightability front is that "compilations" of non-copyrightable items can be copyrightable even if the underlying items themselves are not, if the "selection, coordination, or arrangement" of those items involves sufficient creativity to be considered an "original work…
Re: Google’s Supreme Court faceoff with Oracle was a disaster for Google
#270Earlier quoted context omitted.
The IBM implementation of SQL far predates the ISO standard. Does something being standardized somehow relinquish the copyright? The idea of APIs being copyrightable is new, has IBM somehow relinquished its copyright claims for SQL to ISO? This article discusses the possibility at length https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/03/before-it-sued-g...
I think you have to have demonstrated that you have taken steps to protect your copyright. I’d imagine submitting to a standard would relinquish that. Patents on the other hand ...