Curious to hear your reasons for calling Red Hat a dark horse. (Which I presume is some kind of slur/holds a derogatory meaning)
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13624340 and marked it off-topic.
Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle
271–280 of 344 posts
Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle
#272Curious to hear your reasons for calling Red Hat a dark horse. (Which I presume is some kind of slur/holds a derogatory meaning)
You know what they say about assuming, except that it's not true; you just make an ass of yourself.
Personal attacks are not allowed on HN.
We've warned you about rudeness on HN in the past. Since you don't seem to have done it in a while, we won't ban you, but please remember that it's not ok and don't post like this again.
Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle
#273Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe for startups, on the enterprise space I am yet to see any customer move away from Oracle, SQL Server, DB2 and similar.
You simply can't find Postgres DBAs in VA, whereas you can't swing a cat and not hit an Oracle DBA with 10+ years of experience.
Oracle DBAs are super easy to retrain to PostgreSQL because the two systems are quite similar and Postgres is catching up on features it has been missing.
Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle
#274Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a friend who works at IBM he tells me that IBM uses Google cloud for some of their stuff. The irony when you are a cloud provider but use another service.
I mean, that in and of itself ain't really ironic. Lots of cloud providers out there just resell abstractions around / improvements upon other cloud providers. Cloud66 is one with which I'm familiar; their whole business model revolves around wrapping AWS with CloudFoundry-like deployment mechanisms specifically for Ruby codebases (and Docker containers, but I never interacted with them in that capacity).
Yes, and note that IBM do a lot of Oracle support.
Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle
#275Earlier quoted context omitted.
* 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".
> 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".
It's more like they copied the whole table of contents and rewrote your novel in their own words with all the headings copied verbatim. Good luck with claiming fair use on that.
Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle
#276Oracle is set to repeat the trajectory of SCO. Their primary product (the Oracle DB engine) is being displaced by the NoSQL and things like Postgres. The "next generation" of developers equals SQL engines with "old and bad", and when forced, it ends up with Postgres anyway. Oracle used to survive in significant part by the support of the "database administrators" class. This layer of support is also becoming thinner…
This layer of support is also becoming thinner and older. It's not about age(ism) it's that Oracle stabbed them in the back by pushing cloud over on-prem where these guys (and gals) were employed. Now Oracle's biggest supporters are re-skilling to Postgres et al and stopped recommending Oracle to their organisations...
This is what is important to note; Oracle screwed their consulting partners as much as they could by pulling support and 'dev' in-house and simply taking over contracts of big clients. My previous company was hurt quite a lot when Oracle ate BEA. I still talk to clients from back then who miss our support and products as now Oracle is bleeding them dry providing crap. But it seemed like a good idea at the time I guess.
Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle
#277Earlier quoted context omitted.
> pipeline for on-premise licenses Sorry for being a grammar nazi, but this one is a serious pet peeve. The singular of "premises" isn't "premise", it's "premises". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premises
I'm not sure that's correct. The pluralization is for licenses not on-premise. Either way "on-premises licenses" sounds weird so I'm likely to stick with "on-premise licenses" regardless. Sorry.
Either way "on-premises licenses" sounds weird so I'm likely to stick with "on-premise licenses" regardless. Sorry.
Downvoted for expressing contempt for the English language and common decency, but then failing to add in the obvious "irregardless."
Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle
#278Oracle is at that stage where they didn't invent or do anything right in the last 5 years but try to get money from lawsuits.
This is actually not true. Their cloud offering is doing really well. There's some impressive figures here: http://realmoney.thestreet.com/articles/09/15/2016/oracles-c...
I'd view their numbers with some doubt, given that there has been a whistle-blower lawsuit related to it: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-oracle-lawsuit-accounting-...
Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle
#279Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Or even to C# since apparently MS got the memo on Open Source Actually Microsoft was with Oracle on the whole 'API's should be copyrightable' and lobbied on their behalf during the case. Microsoft claimed that: "If Google's position that APIs can't be copyrighted stands, it will "destabilize" the entire software industry" https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/02/microsoft-forese...
One wonders where they stand now that they've reimplemented the Linux kernel APIs in Windows 10.
Microsoft has a license to the UNIX APIs from AT&T via Cal BSD.
Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle
#280Let's slap a great big IANAL on this before I start: The fair use decision was wrong. It relied on a fundamental misunderstanding of the term transformative where the use of the code was considered rather than merely the implementation. So Oracle has a huge case here. Moreover, practically it doesn't matter. Even if fair use is established in this case, the door has been left wide open to hordes of API copyright trol…
> Even if fair use is established in this case, the door has been left wide open to hordes of API copyright trolls FYI, this is not actually the case; this case established no precedent for copyrightable APIs. Because of the history of this case (it originally involved patents as well), it was appealed to the Federal Circuit, which doesn't normally handle copyright cases. This was a gift for Oracle since the Federal…
Anyone can make any case appealable to the Federal Circuit just by throwing in any claim arising under the patent laws. You can add an obviously bogus and unrelated patent claim in initial filings and then drop it in pre-trial and still guarantee biased CAFC jurisdiction.
You could probably force a random criminal trial into the CAFC with a little creativity. It's really easy to go to CAFC if you want to. And if you're abusing intellectual property law, you really want to because they're corrupt like a Venezuelan payday loan used car dealer.