81–90 of 232 posts
I did not follow every step, but assuming Oracle win this, will it also apply to Amazon proposing DocumentDB with the same API that MongoDB ?
Or Postgres APIs? Nginx plugins? Etc
IMO there's two ways to read this: either A) this is a baldly transparent attempt to "own the libs" and punish a company that the administration sees as a threat or B) they are too incompetent to understand the technical nuances of the case and are essentially morons. Maybe both? This administration can't be thrown out on their collective asses fast enough...
IMO there's two ways to read this: either A) this is a baldly transparent attempt to "own the libs" and punish a company that the administration sees as a threat or B) they are too incompetent to understand the technical nuances of the case and are essentially morons. Maybe both? This administration can't be thrown out on their collective asses fast enough...
It's both. Ellison is fundraising for Trump (ironic how an actual billionaire is helping subsidize a fake one to re-election), and Trump is technologically an imbecile who doesn't use email and uses Twitter...poorly.
As an influencer, he is practically impossible to ignore. Granted, some of that comes from the status of the president, but it just seem petty to say that he does not use Twitter well.
I would argue he is the only thing keeping Twitter afloat.
IMO there's two ways to read this: either A) this is a baldly transparent attempt to "own the libs" and punish a company that the administration sees as a threat or B) they are too incompetent to understand the technical nuances of the case and are essentially morons. Maybe both? This administration can't be thrown out on their collective asses fast enough...
It's both. Ellison is fundraising for Trump (ironic how an actual billionaire is helping subsidize a fake one to re-election), and Trump is technologically an imbecile who doesn't use email and uses Twitter...poorly.
I did not follow every step, but assuming Oracle win this, will it also apply to Amazon proposing DocumentDB with the same API that MongoDB ?
> The administration found Google's policy arguments are "unpersuasive" and argued software code is copyrightable. What? Wasn't it about APIs not code?
It’s unclear to me if the administration only sides with Oracle on this count, or also on reimplementation of APIs, which would have sweeping impacts.
[1] https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/19/16503076/oracle-vs-googl...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whataboutism does not in any way dismiss the fact that Ellison's fundraising efforts for the current administration could play into this. Especially given the behavior of the justice department over the past few months.
It's not whataboutism. I am demonstrating that two politically opposed administrations came to the same decision. This implies that the basis of the decision may not be campaign contributions.
Except you didn't actually demonstrate that, since they involve different appeals which did not present the exact same questions to the Court.
To demonstrate what you are trying to demonstrate you need to look at the two petitions and the briefs submitted by the two administrations, and see how much the two administrations agreed on whatever questions, if any, were common to the two petitions.
I did not follow every step, but assuming Oracle win this, will it also apply to Amazon proposing DocumentDB with the same API that MongoDB ?
And Windows, whose APIs are from OS/2's Presentation Management layer. And Linux/OS X, many of whose APIs are from Unix! I don't know where Oracle thinks the madness should end, and I don't think they care.
[1] https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/brand3653.htm
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Both. 50 years of people cynically saying "all politicians are crooks". And now we have legitimate sleazeballs running the country and nobody believes it. On the one hand, Google is huge and needs competition. On the other hand: not this way. Antitrust and monopoly laws exist for a reason, but if you look at telephones in the 80's and microsoft & intel in the 90's, better lawyers get you around that. We need trustbus…
The government caused the phone monopoly and the slap on the risk had nothing to do with Microsoft's missteps when it came to the internet and later mobile. Microsoft still has the same dominance on the desktop that they had during the 90's.
Even before the government sanctioned their monopoly, AT&T was becoming a monopoly using strategies that the feds were arguing were anti-competitive and in violation of antitrust laws. You could argue the government first acquiesced their monopoly with the Kingsbury Commitment in 1913.
In the '20s and '30s, the government allowed them to resume buying up local carriers and established the FCC to set rates, but there was still tension and antitrust suits up until the '50s.
Like any relation, the government's and Ma Bell's was always "complicated".
they were pursuing a number of antitrust cases against them. Needless to say, AT&T's relationship with the federal government and regulators wasn't static over the next 60-70 years. Sometimes it was at odds, sometimes it was symbiotic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> At an earlier stage in litigation, the Obama administration took a similar position, urging the Supreme Court not to accept Google's appeal. Am I understanding this correctly that this has been a bipartisan position?
Ellison hosted a big fundraiser for Trump literally yesterday and Obama regularly golfed with Ellison. I’m not usually a conspiracy theorist but it’s clear the guy is connected and it stands to reason it might influence the government position. https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/politics/2020/02/12/tru... https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/politics/2020/02/18/bar... Edit: some suggest Ellison doesn’t play golf, t…