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

Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf]

supremecourt.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 965 posts

Re: Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf]

#13

Post by mrkstu »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #2

Oh my God. What a relief.

Yep. This case was an existential threat to multitudes of industries and the assumptions they were built on.

The weird thing is it would of hurt Oracle as much as anyone. I have no clue how anyone w/any technical merit didn't understand that this was a footgun of the largest possible magnitude for them.

Re: Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf]

#14

Post by ocdtrekkie »

This is a pretty unfortunate ruling and I have some questions about the shoddy claims made in this document (the one suggesting Oracle benefitted from its platform being ripped off without license is particularly rich, especially considering it was the death warrant on Java as a mobile platform entirely, right before mobile became huge).

But what can we expect from the fine folks behind Citizens United?

Re: Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf]

#15

Post by politelemon »

tyingq wrote: post #5

The HN discussion from 2016 (Jury finds for Google): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11781053 From 2018 (Oracle revives matter via appeal): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16688521 Edit: Fixed, had written "Jury finds for Oracle", which was NOT what happened in 2016. Argh.

I'm unfamiliar with the legal system (judicial system?). I had thought that the jury's findings were final. Am I understanding correctly that the case still went to the Supreme Court of the US, and now that court finds in favor of Google.

What happens after this, more appeals or is this like a proper static const readonly final?

Re: Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf]

#17

Post by mindcrime »

This appears to be the "money quote":

We reach the conclusion that in this case, where Google reimplemented a user interface, taking only what was needed to allow users to put their accrued talents to work in a new and transformative program, Google’s copying of the Sun Java API was a fair use of that material as a matter of law.

Also, while I hate to just repeat things that have already been said, I feel compelled to say

"What a relief!"

because this would have been a complete disaster if they had gotten this decision wrong. In fact, I'm not sure "complete disaster" is a strong enough phrase to reflect what it would have meant for the software industry if this had come down the other way. So getting this looming disaster out of the way is a tremendous relief.

Re: Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf]

#18

Post by mycall »

> Computer programs differ to some extent from many other copyrightable works because computer programs always serve a functional purpose.

So a computer program instructs processors to do things while books do not necessarily instruct neurons to do things. This seems like a leap. I could write a book with NOP for every word or I could write a program with NOP loops. Are these really instruction to do things? Like so, books do instruct people (aka knowledge).

Re: Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf]

#20

Post by gjsman-1000 »

mrkstu wrote: post #13
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #2

Oh my God. What a relief.

Yep. This case was an existential threat to multitudes of industries and the assumptions they were built on. The weird thing is it would of hurt Oracle as much as anyone. I have no clue how anyone w/any technical merit didn't understand that this was a footgun of the largest possible magnitude for them.

In my own mind, when CentOS died Oracle was saying you should move to "Oracle Unbreakable Linux"... which is a downstream clone of RHEL, just like CentOS was. Just one example of the hypocrisy.
Post reply on HN