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

Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 344 posts

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#101

Post by jolux »

punctilio wrote: post #98
jolux wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it's almost more of a "plagiarism" case than a "copyright infringement" Do you know what the definition of plagiarism is? Google it, "copyright infringement" is listed as a synonym.

Actually, plagiarism and copyright infringement are different things. For example, it is possible to plagiarize something that is not copyrighted, and many forms of copyright infringement wouldn't fit the definition of plagiarism.

True, but the parent seems to think they wouldn't have been plagiarizing if they had "paraphrased" the declaring code so to speak, which makes the relationship here explicit. If they had paraphrased the declaring code, it would have been much harder to say they were infringing on copyright, but instead, they copied it verbatim.

Of course, in academia paraphrasing is still plagiarism, but it is likely no longer copyright infringement especially in this case.

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#102

Post by coredog64 »

uiri wrote: post #17
sddfd wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still don't understand why Google did not buy Sun Microsystems. They hired a lot of the staff anyway, and could have avoided the lawsuit.

Hiring the staff and handling the lawsuit - Google has their own in-house law firm anyways - has likely worked out to be cheaper for them than buying Sun Microsystems would have been.

Yes, but the downside on a lawsuit if Oracle prevails will be much worse.

Imagine, if you will, all that Sun IP in the hands of Google instead of Oracle. ZFS might have gotten a license friendlier to Linux, Solaris could have stayed open source, and I would put money on Google having spun Java out into a completely open foundation that wouldn't have done what Oracle has done with new EE versions.

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#103

Post by [deleted] »

AsyncAwait wrote: post #55
Spivak wrote: post #19

Okay, either I'm crazy or everyone else is. Assuming the court isn't trying to set a new precedent with regards to software it seems like Oracle should have easily won this case. There is an argument to be made that APIs shouldn't be copyrightable but surely it's not fair use -- Google's use of Java doesn't even come close to meeting the criteria.

Google was found in violation of copying some source code if I am not mistaken, but this is about whether the concept of an API itself should be copyrightable, (how many ways can you write an API for a function that adds two integers together?) and that's the big problem here. If handled badly, it can literally kill the software industry. What I don't get is Oracle not realizing that this could kill their SQL busines…

[deleted]

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#104

Post by mjw1007 »

Spivak wrote: post #62
ak4g wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why wouldn't it be fair use? What exactly is your understanding of what the criteria are?

* Purpose of the use -- Gogole's use wasn't transformative, in fact it was explicitly the opposite. * Nature of the use -- Google could try to argue that their use was for the public benefit, but since the Android platform exists for business interests it probably shouldn't qualify. * Amount and Substantiality -- Google basically took it all. There's no case here. They took not just the signatures but their semantic…

The work Oracle copyrighted (and registered) was their implementation of Java SE as a whole, method bodies and all. Google copied only the interface.

If someone copies a paragraph of my novel and claims fair use, I won't get very far on the amount-and-substantiality front by saying "but they basically took all of the part that they copied".

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#105

Post by Oletros »

jolux wrote: post #92
iopq wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If implementing an interface is against copyright, then every Java program is infringing on Oracle's copyright.

http://www.fosspatents.com/2016/05/googles-fair-use-defense-...

I don't think that Florian Mueller is an unbiased source, he was paid by Oracle while the trial was happening

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#106

Post by Oletros »

bitmapbrother wrote: post #71

The sequence, structure and organization of those method signatures, in those 37 Java packages, were all GPL'd in the OpenJDK in 2007 by Sun. Regardless of whether API's can be copyrighted or not, Google had every right to use the code Sun GPL'd.

Google didn't use OpenJDK, they used Apache Harmony implementation

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#107

Post by glenneroo »

matt_wulfeck wrote: post #97

I'm really looking forward to the next 5 or 6 years, when all of the software patents created in the 90s and 2000's expire. It can't come soon enough.

Or wait until some conglomerate lobbies hard enough to make software patents last as long as the copyright on Micky Mouse.

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#108

Post by jolux »

Oletros wrote: post #105
jolux wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.fosspatents.com/2016/05/googles-fair-use-defense-...

I don't think that Florian Mueller is an unbiased source, he was paid by Oracle while the trial was happening

Well if you could point me to an unbiased source trying to argue the other side of this question, then sure. I really want to know both sides of this issue and it's nearly impossible to find someone separating the quintessential geek love for Google and geek hatred for Oracle from the facts of the case other than Mueller.

Honestly I'm all for liberalizing copyrights and fair use but it makes me mad to see Google going around ripping off everyone else's tech and then claiming fair use when they get sued. The fair use defense is not meant for multi-billion dollar multinational corporations that tried to shirk licensing by violating copyrights.

Furthermore I find it particularly hilarious that everyone thinks Google fights against copyright with the purest of intentions when it seems transparent that less restrictive copyright is in their direct business interests.

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#110

Post by binarymax »

matt_wulfeck wrote: post #97

I'm really looking forward to the next 5 or 6 years, when all of the software patents created in the 90s and 2000's expire. It can't come soon enough.

If only this had to do with patents. Oracle is claiming breach of copyright - which lasts over a hundred years.
Post reply on HN