21–30 of 189 posts
In the last big thread I asked if anyone could provide concrete examples of terrible things that would happen if Oracle won. I didn't get a good response but the comment was buried. My question stands if anyone has a good answer. I'm very open to discussion here.
'The lawsuit began when Oracle sued Google in 2010 over its use of 37 Java APIs, which Oracle acquired when it bought Sun Microsystems. In 2012', am I crazy or is this just a misprint? Oracle sued Google in 2010 before they acquired Sun Microsystems?
Oracle announced buying Sun on Apr 20, 2009.[1]
The deal may have taken a while to complete (as late as 2015), but Oracle got to integrate Sun's assets into Oracle as early as 2010, and indeed that is when everyone (including Oracle) believes Sun was acquired.
----
0: http://i.i.cbsi.com/cnwk.1d/i/ne/pdfs/FINAL_Complaint.pdf
"For me, declaring code is not code," Page said. This sentence sounds pretty odd to me. What does Larry Page mean?
I think he means that the code that doesn't do anything, just describes the interface between two software components is not a code (that you should be prevented from copying) because of its one to one equivalence with the interface. Describing interface with words is exactly the same as declaring it with code. So such code is nothing more or less than verbal description of the interface (or any other description of…
Oooooo shit. Isn't this phrase horrible? Don't get me wrong, I think suing over checkRange is ludicrous... but doesn't saying "declaring code isn't code" terrible? He comes across as he's trying to avoid the issue by playing with words. Of course declaring code is code. The clue is in the name, "declaring CODE".
'The lawsuit began when Oracle sued Google in 2010 over its use of 37 Java APIs, which Oracle acquired when it bought Sun Microsystems. In 2012', am I crazy or is this just a misprint? Oracle sued Google in 2010 before they acquired Sun Microsystems?
There's a period between those sentences. The "In 2012..." is related to "...a judge ruled that APIs can't be copyrighted at all". I don't know when Oracle bought Sun (didn't look it up), but this is not what the sentence(s) is(are) implying.
The lawsuit began when Oracle sued Google in 2010 over its use of 37 Java APIs, which Oracle acquired when it bought Sun Microsystems. In 2012, a judge ruled that APIs can't be copyrighted at all, but an appeals court disagreed.
Not sure what confusion could arise from this.
The more I read about this case the more I think Oracle is right. And the more I think most people, HN readers included, are grossly misinformed. In the last big thread I asked if anyone could provide concrete examples of terrible things that would happen if Oracle won. I didn't get a good response but the comment was buried. My question stands if anyone has a good answer. I'm very open to discussion here.
- Wine and ReactOS would become illegal. In fact, any layer to run Windows apps would become illegal. The only way to run a Windows app would be through Microsoft's blessing
That's a pretty big one.
"For me, declaring code is not code," Page said. This sentence sounds pretty odd to me. What does Larry Page mean?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well in the court a lot of theatrics are in play because of their effect on certain questions/answers
Yeah I guess - but for me it seems like the focus should be on the facts rather than theatrics. That said I have sat on a jury where the performance of the prosecuter played a pivotal role in papering over some of the mistakes in the investigation. But the guy was a perfect gentleman at all times. Innocent until proven guilty.
I sat on a jury once where the behavior of the prosecutor really hurt his case, because he acted like a total dick and was demeaning and rude towards the defendant. In theory that should have nothing to do with the actual merits of the case, but people being people, it created a certain measure of sympathy for the defendant.
In the end, we acquitted the guy for a number of reasons (mysteriously "missing" evidence, an incompetent investigator, perception that the investigator and victim may have lied, etc.) but the prosecutor's behavior was definitely something that all (or most) of the jurors picked up on and commented on.
I believe that simple things like how the prosecutor (or the defendant) carry themselves, and how they act towards other participants in the trial, can absolutely affect the outcome of cases, at least sometimes.
"For me, declaring code is not code," Page said. This sentence sounds pretty odd to me. What does Larry Page mean?
I think he means header files compile to nothing, they do not end up as actual computer instructions. They only serve to help programs call the actual implementations (which he'll see as the real code) correctly.
I'd argue that code that "compiles to nothing" can be protected by copyright, too, even if it is not distributed to customers. E.g., extensive documentation inside comments in the source files is definitely copyrighted. Complex build rules might be copyrightable, too, although they definitely end up in the distributed application.
Therefore, it would probably be counterproductive to assert such a thing in court.
The more I read about this case the more I think Oracle is right. And the more I think most people, HN readers included, are grossly misinformed. In the last big thread I asked if anyone could provide concrete examples of terrible things that would happen if Oracle won. I didn't get a good response but the comment was buried. My question stands if anyone has a good answer. I'm very open to discussion here.