Google and Oracle's decade-long copyright battle reaches Supreme Court • Hacker News Board

Re: Google and Oracle's decade-long copyright battle reaches Supreme Court

#431

Post by monocasa » Sat, Oct 10, 2020, 1:36 AM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #429

monocasa wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You shouldn't have to buy someone to ship a competing implementation. And Sun wasn't torpedoed. Do you have anything else to pivot to?

If Google didn't wanted to be sued (IBM would likely have done the same), their solution was to own Java instead of hoping that their torpedo would have sunk Sun's ship without a hiss. I am not pivoting, Google has only itself to blame for their little J++ adventure. "James Gosling Triangulation's Interview on Google vs. Sun" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYw3X4RZv6Y&feature=youtu.be... Basically wanting Java as fr…

Except Sun never charged for handset/embedded deployments. They charged for access to the J2ME trademark. This case is neither about trademarks nor J2ME.

That means they wouldn't have gotten any money from SavaJe like phones either.

The only people who "torpedoed" Sun was Sun themselves.

And yes, switching from an interoperabilty argument to 'they were morally obligated to buy Sun' is very much pivoting to a different argument.

Also, here's James Gosling later saying that APIs should not be copyrightable. http://nighthacks.com/jag/blog/397/index.html

Re: Google and Oracle's decade-long copyright battle reaches Supreme Court

#432

Post by psychoslave » Sun, Oct 11, 2020, 5:33 AM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #113

psychoslave wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I am not sure I agree with this statement in the absolute. I don’t know, you see, sometimes I have some doubts about my uncertainty. But should I trust my memory about what might have happened in my head in the past? >I think about art, and artists as a musician myself. One advantage of copyright is that it does, indeed, give artists recourse when people use their works without compensation. Practices of art and cul…

Copyright mostly only became relevant once it become practical to mass produce works, e.g. with a printing press. (Which was, although it took some time, the proximate cause of copyright law in Europe.)

The term copyright misguides your assumptions I think. Apparition of printers in China, long before Westen rediscovered it, didn't lead to that kind of laws.

I mean, cultural and social structures also play a meaningful part on what is enacted.

The topic behind copyright is not simply about copy, it's about who benefit of some exclusive privileges on cultural works and what kind of social inequalities are enforcable by law.

Re: Google and Oracle's decade-long copyright battle reaches Supreme Court

#433

Post by salawatdumb » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 5:44 PM UTC

salawat wrote: post #344

mehrdadn wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't seriously suggest copying the width of 1 door handle is equivalent to copying all of the Java API, right? I don't think if Google provided an alternative for 1 function it would be in this lawsuit. Your analogy is just a tiny portion of the alternative I already portrayed: they copied the entire structure of the framework. Copy 1 door handle, 1 steering wheel, 1 precise dashboard design, 1 glove compartment…

The issue is that in engineering there are certain patterns of implementation that are simply converged on. Upholding the API copyright would be like giving Craftsman grounds to sue Ryobi for manufacturing circular saws because Ryobi combined a power cord, an electrical motor, a toothed circular blade and a housing; a state of affairs that only seems even remotely plausible to endorse because source code is inherentl…

You look at yourself and see a developer. I look at you and see someone with their head lodged so far up their rectum that they can't tell whether their posts make them sound like a moron.

I bet you're a rust dev.