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

511–520 of 965 posts

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

#511

Post by beckingz »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #217
EvanAnderson wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now? I've personally heard quantities of code measured in "lines of code" (or, thousands of lines of code-- "K-LOCs") going back to the mid-90's. An acquaintance who worked for IBM in the 70's said it dates back at least that far (measuring developer productivity in the "K-LOCs" they produce).

It's been going on since the 1960s (maybe longer). Personally, I think the best code is the code I don't write. A significant part of my refactoring, is removing as much code as possible, by tweaking algorithms, deriving common base classes, and removing unused code branches. Every line of code is a potential bug. The less code, the less bugs.

Negative lines of code are a good day's work.

https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Negative_2000_Li...

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

#512

Post by CogitoCogito »

pfdietz wrote: post #489
jxf wrote: post #70

While the result is a big relief, I think it's not as decisive as I'm noticing some headlines (and commenters) are claiming. One of the big open questions is "are APIs copyrightable?" The court skirted that question, and instead focused on whether it was fair use: > To decide no more than is necessary to resolve this case, the Court assumes for argument’s sake that the copied lines can be copyrighted, and focuses on…

Making APIs copyrightable is a GOOD thing. It means they aren't patentable.

Could you explain your line of thinking here a bit more?

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

#513

Post by dang »

Threads are paginated for performance reasons (yes we're working on it), so to see the rest of the comments you need to click More at the bottom of the page, or like this:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26699106&p=2

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26699106&p=3

(If you've already seen a bunch of these, I apologize for the annoying repetition.)

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

#514

Post by bschne »

d3ntb3ev1l wrote: post #495
teruakohatu wrote: post #7

> "Google copied approximately 11,500 lines of declaring code from the API, which amounts to virtually all the declaring code needed to call up hundreds of different tasks. Those 11,500 lines, however, are only 0.4 percent of the entire API at issue, which consists of 2.86 million total lines. In considering “the amount and substantiality of the portion used” in this case, the 11,500 lines of code should be viewed as…

So if Java had just bloated their code and those apis code footprint represented a larger % of the overall they’d be guilty? Or if Java trimmed a bunch of non essential packages into modules/extensions Google would be guilty It seems to me the judge is saying, “the house was full of 10 tons of jewelry but the robbers only took 10 pounds so that isn’t really stealing lol “

I think this part here is important regarding your interpretation — it‘s not just about loc

> Google copied these lines not because of their creativity or beauty but because they would allow programmers to bring their skills to a new smartphone computing environment.

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

#515

Post by moron4hire »

dmitryminkovsky wrote: post #233
teruakohatu wrote: post #7

> "Google copied approximately 11,500 lines of declaring code from the API, which amounts to virtually all the declaring code needed to call up hundreds of different tasks. Those 11,500 lines, however, are only 0.4 percent of the entire API at issue, which consists of 2.86 million total lines. In considering “the amount and substantiality of the portion used” in this case, the 11,500 lines of code should be viewed as…

I'm glad about this outcome, because I agree the other outcome would have had a devastating effect on software development. I also appreciate this fair use argument, especially when you point out the code in question was 0.4% of the entire API. Still, I'll always struggle with the idea that "the amount and substantiality of the portion used" when copying an interface is comparable to copying an implementation. The in…

Substantiality was only one factor in the decision. There were lots of others, such as raison d'être of copyright, "promoting the progress of science and art". Because allowing copying of APIs is more important to the "progress of science and art" than the economic impact on the creator of the API, APIs are thusly not copyrightable.

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

#516

Post by AnimalMuppet »

marc__1 wrote: post #333

Oracle's response[1]: "The Google platform just got bigger and market power greater — the barriers to entry higher and the ability to compete lower. They stole Java and spent a decade litigating as only a monopolist can. This behavior is exactly why regulatory authorities around the world and in the United States are examining Google's business practices." - Dorian Daley, Executive Vice President and General Counsel,…

Here, Oracle, let me break out the world's smallest violin...

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

#517

Post by drallison »

The SCOTUS decision on API Fair Use is the correct one. Students of intellectual property law and computer programs will find the briefing for the Supreme Court fascinating. I find it hard to see how the Circuit Panel that overturned the original pro-Google decision to Oracle's favor in the light of the arguments and evidence provided. The briefing for the Cert, particularly the amici, is worth reading. Oracle tried to move the argument into the public square by encouraging "experts" to write damning op-ed articles for news outlets and for the semi-technical press about the evils that Google did. Often their articles misplayed a shallow understanding of the issues and history of the Oracle/Google dispute.

The SCOTUS decision cuts through the cruft and reaches the right finding in this case. It shows that the Supremes can can pay attention and do the right thing.

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

#518

Post by xapata »

d3ntb3ev1l wrote: post #495
teruakohatu wrote: post #7

> "Google copied approximately 11,500 lines of declaring code from the API, which amounts to virtually all the declaring code needed to call up hundreds of different tasks. Those 11,500 lines, however, are only 0.4 percent of the entire API at issue, which consists of 2.86 million total lines. In considering “the amount and substantiality of the portion used” in this case, the 11,500 lines of code should be viewed as…

So if Java had just bloated their code and those apis code footprint represented a larger % of the overall they’d be guilty? Or if Java trimmed a bunch of non essential packages into modules/extensions Google would be guilty It seems to me the judge is saying, “the house was full of 10 tons of jewelry but the robbers only took 10 pounds so that isn’t really stealing lol “

Who is this "Java" you're personifying?

Perhaps the measurement should have been a count of bytecode instructions rather than lines of code.

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

#519

Post by seba_dos1 »

LogicUpgrade wrote: post #391
teruakohatu wrote: post #7

> "Google copied approximately 11,500 lines of declaring code from the API, which amounts to virtually all the declaring code needed to call up hundreds of different tasks. Those 11,500 lines, however, are only 0.4 percent of the entire API at issue, which consists of 2.86 million total lines. In considering “the amount and substantiality of the portion used” in this case, the 11,500 lines of code should be viewed as…

> "Google copied approximately 11,500 lines of declaring code from the API, which amounts to virtually all the declaring code needed to call up hundreds of different tasks. Those 11,500 lines, however, are only 0.4 percent of the entire API at issue, which consists of 2.86 million total lines. In considering “the amount and substantiality of the portion used” in this case, the 11,500 lines of code should be viewed as…

I spy an Oracle employee.

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

#520

Post by chris_wot »

franklampard wrote: post #327
hammock wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if I copy the entire A volume of Encyclopedia Britannica, but leave B-Z alone, I'm good?

No but it’s okay to copy all the entry names in the encyclopedia and fill in the content yourself

Wikipedia already does this. For instance, there is currently a list of Australian Dictionary of Biography articles missing.[1]

I maintain a reflist of women in the ADB who have no Wikipedia article.[2]

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Australi...

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chris.sherlock/Australian...

Post reply on HN