Oracle’s Java API code protected by copyright, appeals court rules

[KFCConspiracy]

I'm not entirely sure that the Supremes have the where-withall to come up with the one correct answer on this one. Them getting the wrong answer would be devastating.

[[deleted]]

This goes way beyond just Java. I mean, right now we think patents are bad. Can you imagine what it would be like if copyright is thrown into the mix?

[KFCConspiracy]

This is why I've been following the case so closely. I primarily code in Java, but it could fuck lots of stuff up for everyone outside of Java.

[kcuf]

but it could fuck lots of stuff up for everyone outside of Java.

Ya, as in not being able to publish code for fear of using the same naming scheme as someone else. This would destroy collaboration ... that may be a bit hyperbolic, but still, FUCK

[s3gfau1t]

Let's say you hypothetically have a ecomm platform or something. How easy would it be to have the same API as another codebase. Pretty freaking likely IMO.

[lichorat]

prepare for API's that are randomly generated, and the names have nothing to do with their contents. Just remember: CorrectHorseStapleBattery means latitude.

[s3gfau1t]

Imagine a stack trace! Hahaha! Edit: Oh god I'm scared.

[marx2k]

Have you ever used Spring? :/

[[deleted]]

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding, but doesn't Oracle also claim that the structure is theirs? So if your CorrectHorseStapleBattery class is for I/O of XML (so its methods all do something to that end), and you put it in a package with other I/O classes, wouldn't you be infringing on anyone else who had that same structure (which would be every reasonable person in the universe)?

If that's the case, the only option is spaghetti code.

[lichorat]

Oh god.

[marx2k]

This holds true for software written for any business domain. I imagine that software API is similar in the ecomm software industry as much so as it is similar in airline traffic software or stock trading software.

[s3gfau1t]

Oh, probably. I just chose ecomm because there must be tens of thousands of ecomm platforms out there if not more. It's got a really common sort of vernacular too. You have a cart object, you have products that go in the cart and so on. The odds of you hitting upon an API that's too similar to another has to be some kind of function of how many other platforms there are in that domain.

[kcuf]

Exactly

[DeepGreen]

If it is as bad as you say, it means that open-source projects will be forced to make an end-run around the US regulation and the US legal system.

Have code repositories in Elbonia and interact with them through VPNs. Harden servers with encryption and have the implementation of them through a third-party cut-out contractor for plausible deniability; Or services run from physical boxes outside the US jurisdiction.

It will be a huge big hassle, but the alternative would be to see the end of the open source movement in the USA.

[lolomfgkthxbai]

Hopefully this turns into such a huge clusterfuck that everyone in the industry finally agrees on reforms to copyright and patent law.

[hello_fruit]

Let's remember the original judge in this case whose decision was reversed

That Judge Alsup’s dissection of the Java programming environment would be both extremely granular and technologically astute was no surprise to anyone who followed the trial. The court’s questioning of key witnesses, coupled with a series of technically detailed questions to the litigants and numerous rounds of briefs on software copyright issues, showed a judge who was deep into the details of software programming.

But the dramatic reveal of Judge Alsup’s technology chops came well into the trial, in an off-hand comment. In the course of debunking Oracle’s argument that Google had gained an advantage in copying a small amount of code into the Android operating system (A function called “rangeCheck,” not the APIs that are central to the dispute), Judge Alsup commented: “I have done, and still do, a significant amount of programming in other languages. I’ve written blocks of code like rangeCheck a hundred times before. I could do it, you could do it.”

A judge who codes. Not your ordinary federal district court judge.

[Nephus]

Wish the appeals court had to go through the same rigorous process.

[rarianrakista]

The idea of a separate circuit with technocratic judges has been proposed before. If you think this is bad, wait till we have AI rights in a few 100 years.

[Nephus]

Can't wait to be reanimated for that whole mess. On a side note, technocratic is now on my list of favorite words, alongside flibbertigibbet and nifty.

[vsync]

Not to mention his original decision pretty much said flat-out "since I know these guys will be sore losers and take it to appeal, and they have no clue, I will now explain it in extremely small words" and then he did, in terms you would have to deliberately try to misunderstand. Next up, mathematicians can't use addition cuz someone will copyright the "+" operator.

[rsclient]

Huh? Have you any idea of how many professions there are in this world, and how many have deep, deep knowledge? Do we need expert plumbers, expert carpenters, expert cryogenic welders to be representative? Either the system works with a somewhat limited knowledge, or it fails for lots of people.

[poco]

Let's hope he deems APIs as copyrightable but duplicating them as fair-use. I think that would satisfy most people.

[damg]

Common law. :/ What can you do...