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

White House Sides with Oracle, Tells Supreme Court APIs Are Copyrightable

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 165 posts

Re: White House Sides with Oracle, Tells Supreme Court APIs Are Copyrightable

#71

Post by dragonwriter »

jMyles wrote: post #61
TallGuyShort wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the term "White House" often used to refer to anything within the executive branch? I have always assumed it meant the office of the President and perhaps his cabinet...

I've been exposed to or worked on a few style guides on this topic. I think pretty much universally, in US media, "White House" means elements of the executive branch outside the cabinet-level departments. So it includes the Executive Office of the President, the OMB, ONDCP, DoJ, etc. It does not include law enforcement or intelligence agencies, nor cabinet-level departments. So "White House" does not mean FBI, DEA,…

> I've been exposed to or worked on a few style guides on this topic. I think pretty much universally, in US media, "White House" means elements of the executive branch outside the cabinet-level departments.

That would mean most non-cabinet and "independent" agencies -- all of which are part of the executive branch and not part of a cabinet-level department -- would be part of the "White House", which assuredly is not the common use.

Usually, it means specifically the Executive Office of the President. (Rarely, it might even more specifically mean the White House Office, which is within the Executive Office of the President and, like the Executive Office, also headed by the White House Chief of Staff.)

> So it includes the Executive Office of the President, the OMB, ONDCP, DoJ, etc.

OMB and ONDCP are part of the Executive Office of the President. [0]

DoJ (which, relevant to the thread, includes the Office of the Solicitor General) is a cabinet-level department (headed by the Attorney-General), and so even if your excessively-broad "outside the cabinet-level departments" rule was correct, would still be excluded.

[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Office_of_the_Preside...

Re: White House Sides with Oracle, Tells Supreme Court APIs Are Copyrightable

#72

Post by saryant »

rodgerd wrote: post #27
nastygibbon wrote: post #6

Can someone give us an ELI5? Pros/Cons etc.

Con: all the BSDs and Linux are now owned by whoever most recently picked up the POSIX APIs. ReactOS and WINE are now illegal. SQL is the private property of IBM. Pro: I guess if you hate Google because you love Steve Jobs or something it looks like a win.

None of that has happened. An amicus brief has been filed, that is all. An amicus brief is not law and the Supreme Court has not yet ruled one way or another.

Re: White House Sides with Oracle, Tells Supreme Court APIs Are Copyrightable

#73

Post by runn1ng »

hajile wrote: post #20
nastygibbon wrote: post #6

Can someone give us an ELI5? Pros/Cons etc.

Pros: Oracle makes a bunch of money from Android. Cons: Kills innovation for fear of lawsuits. Feeds the patent trolls.

The case doesn't touch patent law in the slightest, if I understand it correctly, though.

(I am not saying the DoJ opinion is good in any regards whatsoever, to be clear)

Re: White House Sides with Oracle, Tells Supreme Court APIs Are Copyrightable

#75

Post by iolothebard »

discordianfish wrote: post #69

I think this will cause a lot people to move away from java and ultimately harm Oracle most, causing other companies to not follow their example. Let's just stay away from java, there are plenty of free languages.

I'm doing everything I can to kill Oracle at my organization. I work for the State government too. One success story will breed many more is my hope.

Re: White House Sides with Oracle, Tells Supreme Court APIs Are Copyrightable

#76

Post by Crito »

Zikes wrote: post #54
rodgerd wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Con: all the BSDs and Linux are now owned by whoever most recently picked up the POSIX APIs. ReactOS and WINE are now illegal. SQL is the private property of IBM. Pro: I guess if you hate Google because you love Steve Jobs or something it looks like a win.

It's all fun and games until IBM sues Oracle for SQL royalties.

If I didn't think it would negatively impact the rest of the industry, I'd pay to watch that.

Re: White House Sides with Oracle, Tells Supreme Court APIs Are Copyrightable

#77

Post by andrewrice »

eropple wrote: post #38
TallGuyShort wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the term "White House" often used to refer to anything within the executive branch? I have always assumed it meant the office of the President and perhaps his cabinet...

It's called metonymy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymy

See also synecdoche.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synecdoche

Re: White House Sides with Oracle, Tells Supreme Court APIs Are Copyrightable

#78

Post by pornel »

billsix wrote: post #40
JoshTriplett wrote: post #12

On the one hand, this would have serious implications for compatible FOSS reimplementations of proprietary APIs, such as Wine, libc, emulators, etc. On the other hand, this would make it far easier to enforce copyleft licenses like the GPL. I'm one of the people who provided text and examples filed in the EFF's amicus brief against, and on balance I'm not a fan of stricter copyright like this, but it's interesting to…

I'd be curious to hear RMS's stance on the issue, but I'm guessing he would agree with Oracle. http://clisp.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/clisp/clisp/doc/Why-...

I'm not sure. His main argument in this case was that distribution of a non-GPL program with intention of letting user link with a GPL library was a "subterfuge".

Google's case is different. They didn't write Android so users can choose between a dummy libDoesNotRunAnything or wink, wink unlicensed Oracle JVM.

Re: White House Sides with Oracle, Tells Supreme Court APIs Are Copyrightable

#79

Post by mark-r »

runn1ng wrote: post #73
hajile wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pros: Oracle makes a bunch of money from Android. Cons: Kills innovation for fear of lawsuits. Feeds the patent trolls.

The case doesn't touch patent law in the slightest, if I understand it correctly, though. (I am not saying the DoJ opinion is good in any regards whatsoever, to be clear)

No, but it adds copyright trolls to the mix. At least you can count on patents to expire eventually, copyrights are forever in software years.

Re: White House Sides with Oracle, Tells Supreme Court APIs Are Copyrightable

#80

Post by remarkEon »

dragonwriter wrote: post #57
Spooky23 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DOJ people don't just wake up and submit opinions to the Supreme Court at the approval of some random middle manager.

> DOJ people don't just wake up and submit opinions to the Supreme Court at the approval of some random middle manager. Well, no, the Solicitor General, under whose authority such things are done (and who is the person to whom the Supreme Court issues -- as it did in this case -- "invitations" [treated as commands] for input), is one of the highest-ranking officers at DoJ. And still not part of the White House.

The Solicitor General is still appointed by the WH, and confirmed by the Senate. I would think that he/she, ostensibly speaking, would probably be in direct dialogue with the WH with respect to the executive's position on legal matters, especially considering that they so often end up on the Supreme Court anyway.
Post reply on HN