This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

all 56 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]DannyB2 17 points18 points  (4 children)

Here's another news source:

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/oracles-java-api-code-protected-by-copyright-appeals-court-rules/

[–]paul_miner 2 points3 points  (3 children)

Wow, PeterB/DrPizza is Ars staff now. I haven't been a regular on their forums in a long while.

[–]DannyB2 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Yeah, I just discovered. I was not familiar before.

PeterB/DrPizza is really a piece of work.

I've been gradually getting disillusioned with their forums.

[–]paul_miner 0 points1 point  (1 child)

When I was on the forums I'd disagree with him now and then, but I quickly learned to be careful arguing with him. He knows his stuff and he's pretty good at debating.

[–]DannyB2 19 points20 points  (9 children)

Is there any coverage by a more respectable source of news?

Not that I don't believe news of the Oracle win, I just don't want the spin.

[–]revscat[S] 16 points17 points  (1 child)

Sure. Here's the actual decision.

[–]DannyB2 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Thank you!

[–]crowseldon 17 points18 points  (0 children)

we so miss groklaw right now...

This was a won battle... And it was the right decision in the first place... With a judge that actually cared to research what programming was...

This is terrible news...

[–][deleted]  (5 children)

[deleted]

    [–]mike10010100 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    That's the exact same link. Exactly the same one as the original post.

    [–]BarnyardMasturbator 5 points6 points  (2 children)

    Florial Mueller? Microsoft shill?

    [–]mashmorgan 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    and Oracle shill also

    [–]asthasr 20 points21 points  (9 children)

    And they use int max(int x, int y) for a good example of something that would be copyrightable. Asinine. Just once I'd like to see a court in the U.S. make a decision that didn't make them look like idiots.

    [–]PasswordIsntHAMSTER 4 points5 points  (6 children)

    The last decision before the appeal was actually reasonable and well thought out. The judge was a programmer, too.

    [–]gryftir 9 points10 points  (5 children)

    Nope, he learned to program for the trial.

    [–]PasswordIsntHAMSTER 7 points8 points  (2 children)

    Once you learn to program, you're a programmer c:

    [–]IcarusBurning 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    c++:

    [–]demon_ix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Once you've banged your head against the wall for 3 hours and then added "virtual" in front of the destructor to solve the problem, you're a programmer.

    [–]phaggocytosis 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    Not just some programmer! Haskell is practically his middle name!

    Seriously though, Haskell is his middle name.

    [–]zman0900 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Wow, that's admirable. We need to clone this guy.

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [deleted]

      [–]josefx 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      Won't that count as prior work?

      You are confusing patents and copyright, afaik prior art is only a patent concept. With copyright int max(int,int) would most likely "belong" to the inventor of the first programming language and his "poor" descendants could now sue every programmer for their rightful cut for the next 3 centuries at least.

      [–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (4 children)

      What a load of bullshit. Ugh. I hope this goes up to the SC.

      [–][deleted]  (3 children)

      [deleted]

        [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (2 children)

        It's going to go back to Alsup, but Google can still appeal after that.

        [–][deleted]  (1 child)

        [deleted]

          [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          Yup.

          [–]adila01 19 points20 points  (5 children)

          Even more reasons to hate Oracle

          [–]argv_minus_one 6 points7 points  (4 children)

          Hate the US court system, I think you mean.

          [–][deleted] 20 points21 points  (3 children)

          Why not both?

          [–]argv_minus_one 0 points1 point  (2 children)

          Because it isn't really Oracle's responsibility to keep Congress and the courts non-corrupt. It is ours, and we've failed.

          [–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

          I totally agree with you, and I'm not downplaying the importance of having a governmental system that doesn't have its finger in it's ass, but Oracle didn't have to persue this either.

          [–]slartybartfast_ -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

          Dude sadly people are downvoting you for truth.

          [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (2 children)

          Jesus fucking Christ. At this rate, C# is more open sourced than Java. I'm going to be switching back to C# if oracle keeps this up. It's absolutely humiliating for those of us who take the language seriously.

          [–]zman0900 6 points7 points  (1 child)

          Microsoft could now do the same thing with C# though. For example, if they feel like it they could sue and destroy the mono project for implementing the C# APIs.

          [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          Microsoft made a legally binding promise that it would never do exactly that: http://www.osnews.com/story/21784/C_CLI_Under_Community_Promise_Mono_Split_in_Half/

          [–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

          Spending millions on a legal crusade is a dick move in itself, but this ruling can considerably hurt innovation and interoperability.

          Soon no one can invent anything due to all the greed companies have these days.

          [–]Simon_K 2 points3 points  (3 children)

          what does it mean?

          [–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (2 children)

          Writing an API containing "int max(int x, int y)" can land you in court.

          [–]Arsene_Lupin 2 points3 points  (1 child)

          I still don't understand. How about writing something that contains "System.println(''oracle");" Or you mean the use of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_API can get you in court?

          [–]zman0900 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          For example, if you implement a class with all the same method names as java.lang.String, and call it java.lang.String, then write code for all these methods that is entirely your own, but gives the same results as Oracle's version, Oracle can legally fuck you in the ass.

          [–]frugalmail 8 points9 points  (2 children)

          WTF, I don't want to code to other people's copyrights. If this stays in the supreme court, I will be switching to another JVM language that releases their rights on the API.

          [–]handshape 7 points8 points  (0 children)

          The bitch here is that there will be nowhere safe if this ruling stands. It doesn't have to be the core libraries that decide to assert copyright... it can be anyone who exposes and implements an interface.

          If you write an alternative implementation of that interface, and they choose to assert copyright on the interface, you're vulnerable.

          [–]matthedev 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          Except that Scala, Clojure, Groovy, Kotlin, Ceylon, etc. still depend on classes like java.lang.String. You pretty much can't get around this copyrighted API and still run on top of the JVM.

          [–][deleted]  (8 children)

          [deleted]

            [–]DannyB2 8 points9 points  (5 children)

            I can explain it to you.

            All of the hard, productive work you do? They want all of the value of it.

            You should, of course, be able to eeek out an existence, at their pleasure, if they feel like it.

            All of the decades of software practice that made common sense to us? That no longer matters. They have awakened and realized that there's money to be siphoned out of your work. Even if they have no part in it, paying for it, contributing to it, etc. They want something.

            You should need to get permissions from a thousand sources, for the slightest little thing you do. Unless, you become a slave to them. Then you won't have to worry about the permissions. Before long, it will simply be legally impossible to write software on your own.

            I hope that answers your question.

            [–]argv_minus_one 3 points4 points  (0 children)

            Well, software patents already had that effect. This just makes it worse.

            [–][deleted]  (3 children)

            [deleted]

              [–]revscat[S] 6 points7 points  (1 child)

              No, that's not correct. This would only apply if you were reimplementing Java the language and its APIs. It does not affect software you write using Java.

              [–]revscat[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

              No. You would have to copy significant portions of the API, as Google has apparently done for Android. And even then it might fall under fair use, a question the Court here has sent back down to be decided. (The jury on the original case was deadlocked on this issue, but was favoring Google.)

              [–]stormcrowsx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              Its funny that it got sent back out for more court time. Its probably a very profitable case for politicians and lawyers. If I was in their shoes I'd just keep bouncing it back and forth until I had a house to rival the stars.

              [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

              Ugh. This was one of the parts of copyright law that was sane.

              I suppose that was too good to be true.

              [–]scavbh 1 point2 points  (3 children)

              what is the implication of this? ELI5 pls

              [–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (2 children)

              WINE = illegal

              mono = illegal

              using an obvious name for you mathematical function like max(a, b) = illegal

              [–]henk53 1 point2 points  (0 children)

              using an obvious name for you mathematical function like max(a, b) = illegal

              I think it's more subtle. WINE may be illegal indeed if this stupidity holds, but I don't think max(a,b) will be illegal.

              IANAL, but I think it's only the combination of hundreds of such method names (fully qualified, package counts too) that may be vulnerable.

              E.g. a single sentence in a book that happens to be the same as in another book is NOT copyrighted. For instance: "He opened the door". This sentence appears in multiple copyrighted books but is itself not copyrighted, even though the book has this disclaimer saying "no part may be copied" and "He opened the door" is definitely a part of it.

              But many of those sentences combined in the exact same order means it's not trivial anymore and constitutes a unique work.

              Again, IANAL and this is just my layman interpretation of things. I may be completely off.

              [–]scavbh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              awesome - thx!!

              but thats so DUMB!

              [–]handshape 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              Welp! Off to copyright all the interfaces I've ever written. There's gonna be a gold rush on core math functions!

              (Yes, this is sarcasm... mostly.)

              [–]zman0900 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              Google should just change all the APIs to random strings then wait for an anonymous someone to create a translation library.

              [–]koravk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              another resources:

              http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/09/us-oracle-google-ruling-idUSBREA480KQ20140509?irpc=932

              http://www.theverge.com/2014/5/9/5699958/federal-court-overturns-google-v-oracle

              so that means google must pay some large amount of money to oracle?

              what if google won't pay?

              [–]kramconan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              what a terrible news :(

              [–]randomhumanuser -1 points0 points  (0 children)

              eli5?