|
|
|
| Authored by: hardmath on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 09:23 AM EDT |
Not that any should be needed, but to quote Pink, let's get
the party started!
---
Do the arithmetic or be doomed to talk nonsense. -- John McCarthy (1927-2011)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: hardmath on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 09:26 AM EDT |
GNU news is good news!
Please give a link to the News Picks article when starting a
discussion/thread.
Thanks!
---
Do the arithmetic or be doomed to talk nonsense. -- John McCarthy (1927-2011)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: hardmath on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 09:29 AM EDT |
Did you hear the one about the gazillionaire who thought he
could copyright a programming language? Turned out he'd had
way too much java.
On topic posts will be punished with similarly ill-conceived
"humor"...
---
Do the arithmetic or be doomed to talk nonsense. -- John McCarthy (1927-2011)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- The history of supercomputers - Authored by: JamesK on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 11:05 AM EDT
- Off Topic - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 11:17 AM EDT
- Less time on Groklaw from now - - Authored by: kattemann on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 02:05 PM EDT
- There are times - Authored by: symbolset on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 02:06 PM EDT
- Patents are helpful, some say - Authored by: mbouckaert on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 03:44 PM EDT
- Student charged with reselling books?? - Authored by: hAckz0r on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 04:23 PM EDT
- Tracking the trackers (a global analysis of cookies) - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 05:48 PM EDT
- Wired article out now - Authored by: Gringo_ on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 06:52 PM EDT
- Off Topic - Authored by: PJ on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 06:54 PM EDT
- Setback for ACTA In Europe - Authored by: Gringo_ on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 07:54 PM EDT
- Thinking a thought - Authored by: LocoYokel on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 08:18 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: hardmath on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 09:33 AM EDT |
The
Comes Transcripts project pages
can be posted here, in Plain Old Text mode
for HTML to make
cut-and-paste easier.
Or email 'em to PJ if
humongous.
Thanks!
---
Do the arithmetic or be doomed to talk
nonsense. -- John McCarthy (1927-2011) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 09:39 AM EDT |
It took years for SCo to get to court. I guess BSF are losing their touch, or
this Judge is wise to them.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 09:49 AM EDT |
What matters now is: can Oracle copyright APIs
and can it
copyright a computer language? That's what the
trial is now about, and the
answers to both questions matter
enormously to the software industry and to
FOSS.
I doubt Oracle will prevail on the question of copyright.
If
the language is deemed seprate from the APIs, it still
cannot be
copyrighted because it cannot be "fixed in some
medium." How could one
do that on a language?
When it comes to the APIs Oracle shot itself in the
foot in
its submission talking about APIs a few days ago when Oracle
stated:
"It is a detailed written description of the
programs
that explains how the programs are structured, how
they are to be
used, and what they will do."
.
..."are to be used"...
labels APIs as methods of
operation and thus cannot be potected by copyright. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: awkScooby on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 10:06 AM EDT |
I'm so confused. I thought the next step was for Oracle to declare
bankruptcy...[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 11:17 AM EDT |
I sincerely hope that Kernighan and Ritchie sue them for
creating an incompatible version of C.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 01:41 PM EDT |
I always though Sun was a hardware company.
---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.
"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: IMANAL_TOO on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 01:41 PM EDT |
Ooops. From the first report.
Google objects to slide [to be
used] in Oracle's opening statement to the jurors citing $7.4B purchase of
Sun as being prejudicial.
Oracle states that Java "was the most
significant software purchase" that it had made.
From The
Register:
Steven Harris, the senior vice president of
Oracle's massive application server product development, told EclipseCon
Wednesday that the Java Community Process (JCP) - the body officially
responsible for making changes to Java - needs to be "tweaked" so that Java
could become more responsive to changing needs. Oracle is a long-standing member
of Eclipse.
The JCP under former steward and majority owner Sun
Microsystems became a by-word for slow-moving bureaucracy and vendor-friendly
specs that turned developers off Java and pushed innovation
elsewhere.[...]
Google's Android is built on Java, but not Sun's Java -
its Dalvik virtual machine makes use of the Apache Software Foundation's version
of Java Standard Edition, called Project Harmony, which has not been officially
certified. Harmony, on the desktop, is not standardized because Sun would not
open-source the test compatibility kits that would have let the project be
validated as compatible with the JCP's official standard.
Next, there's
the question of how Oracle and the JCP bring the Apache and Google renegades
back into the JCP fold. Success would renew the JCP's status while failure will
perpetuate the idea that the JCP is irrelevant and keep innovation in Java
coming from elsewhere."
So, SUN's Java had already started to
putrify, due in part to the JCP and its long-standing members SUN and
Oracle.
Strange case. And, it wasn't even SUN's Java, or the Java
Oracle bought into.
---
______
IMANAL
. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: SilverWave on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 01:46 PM EDT |
Oracle and Google's
Android copyright row trial begins
One to bookmark to see how
accurate it is after the trail.
They also say 1B :-/---
RMS: The 4
Freedoms
0 run the program for any purpose
1 study the source code and change it
2 make copies and distribute them
3 publish modified versions
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Yea!! But does the BBC run on Gnu/Linux? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 03:17 PM EDT
- yes - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 03:32 PM EDT
- yes - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 05:15 PM EDT
- yes - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 09:58 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: IMANAL_TOO on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 02:11 PM EDT |
The REAL jewel in the crown of SUN was not Java, but MySQL.
SUN had
just bought MySQL for $1bn in 2008, and "Wall Street mourned" as it was a big fish they had
missed.
Later, when Oracle had bought SUN, analysts stressed the
importance of MySQL:
Oracle touts the advantages of owning
Java and Solaris in this press release, but mentions nothing of the real jewel
in the crown: MySQL. The $1 billion acquisition has been a point of
contention for Sun’s detractors, but the fact is that despite most of the MySQL
team having quit, the little upstart database keeps on growing and growing.
Oracle also gets some virtualization technologies with the Sun buy. Still, if
you’re an open source enthusiast, you have to worry about this deal’s impact on
open-source projects such as Open Office and MySQL. Oracle is known to squeeze
its acquisitions for every single penny. [...]
MySQL is clearly a big
prize for Oracle. Oracle’s products find no room in most of the new web
companies — most preferring either MySQL or other open-source offerings. On the
high end as well, Oracle has been competing with the MySQL Cluster offering. In
addition, several startups have started to develop a new kind of data-store
ecosystem based on MySQL, which is competitive with Oracle’s database offerings.
In short, Oracle has taken out its No. 1 threat by buying
Sun.
Already in 2006, the MySQL
database was the most commonly used database in the world". With 29 %
of the market share it was larger than former number 1 and 2, Microsoft
Access on 24 % and Oracle on 23 %.
So, all signs are there, the
real jewel in the crown was MySQL. Java was just a coffee on the
side.
---
______
IMANAL
. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: ThrPilgrim on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 02:50 PM EDT |
Judge Alsup to Oracle: If you try to throw around big numbers in front of the
jury just to inflate damages, you are doing so at your own risk; "there is
no proof that Java is worth $7.4B. I am suspicious of your motives."
Ouch, <voice type="Tweetie Pie">I don't think he likes you very
much</voice>
---
Beware of him who would deny you access to information for in his heart he
considers himself your master.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 03:08 PM EDT |
Here are some twitter users who are doing live tweets from the
trial:
James Niccolai Link
Dan Levine Link
Brandon Bailey Link
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 03:14 PM EDT |
Is there anybody left who looks at Google's success and *doesn't*
think about ways to try to get some of Google's money?
There's
a right way and a wrong way to go about getting some of Google's
money.
For individuals, the right way is to send them a CV and ask
nicely for employment.
Alternatively, as an individual or a company,
find something that Google is willing to buy and sell it to them.
Or
find something that Google needs done and offer to do it for a
fee.
There, that's three possible 'right ways' to get money from
Google... [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: cpeterson on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 04:02 PM EDT |
Thank you, thank you, thank you!
Without you, we'd all have to take leave from our jobs and move to SanFran for
two months![ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 04:44 PM EDT |
http://venturebeat.com/2012/04/16/oracle-google-jury/
Mostly based on the twitter comments already mentioned, but still an interesting
read.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 05:54 PM EDT |
That Exhibit List is giant. But there are certainly some interesting items on
there that I would like to read. Have they been made public somewhere online?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 07:00 PM EDT |
|
Link
Jacobs also made a point to highlight the nimble
nature of Java’s language, at one point even comparing it to "Esperanto," an
invented universal language. One of the big hurdles Google faced, he said, was
in pushing updates on the Android platform. Sun Microsystems had a “read once,
write anywhere” update system that Oracle now claims Google copied — without
proper license — into Android.
Seriously, he said that?
I
don't know where to start. I am going to guess the
article writer got it all
wrong.
---
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Cassandra on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 07:16 PM EDT |
I hope, personally, that Google find some alternative software or
designs some and just works away from Java someday. It's not worth all
this.
But surely that was the entire point of Dalvik -
to implement a new Virtual Machine, and only keep the Java language? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: BitOBear on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 08:41 PM EDT |
You know, when a programmer uses the phrase "they suck", especially
when applied to "options" then it doesn't exactly mean what you
think.
Take any programmer, be he very good or very bad, give him a job, let him do a
decent job, then run him over with a bus.
Then get another programmer, give him the same job, let him go for a day or two,
then ask him what he thinks of the bus-crushed programmers code base and he will
say "it sucks".
Whenever a programmer uses a phrase that contains any variation of the word
"sucks" it lights my suspicion light. In the absence of an exact and
particular list of reasons and examples, for something "to suck" means
it is "less than ideal, easy, or free".
For example, Google is, to the ninetieth percentile if my information is
correct, a Java shop. Given the quote above, I see no actual meaning. It doesn't
say that the technologies suck for a reason. The "options" may suck
simply because Bob the Chrome God says he'll quit if we make him use Python and
so we would have to replace Bob.
I have been present at great miscarriages of technology, where the correct tools
and languages were set aside because the company had already bought a particular
version control system that "wouldn't like" the language that would be
otherwise ideal for the job. No Really. This happens all the time. "Dude,
we would totally have to re-write the message passing code. That would
suck." Really.
Imagine a multi-billion dollar company looking at buying a multi-billion dollar
building for a merely multi-million dollar price tag. The building is ideally
suited and ideally positioned. The land alone is worth more than the asking
price. But the CEO decides that "the building sucks" and walks away.
You never learn that his decision is based on entirely on how his over-sized
Stretch Hummer is too tall to fit into the parking structure so his parking
space would have to be one of the un-covered spaces like a hundred yards away
and he'd have to come in through the loading dock.
You may think I exaggerate, but I do not.
Further, programmers often (e.g. like always), try to game their manager using
hyperbole. They just do. "Waaah! I don't want to track my memory usage, and
it sounds hard to go find a garbage collector. This thing is unworkable! This
sucks!"
We are a histrionic and temperamental bunched armed with glittering
generalities. I wish I had know the text of this "prejudicial email"
before. I would have told the Lawyers for Google to do a Bayesian Analysis of
the communications sent by the author, and Google's programming staff in
general, to demonstrate the depth and frequency of the use of the word
"suck". In programming circles its first cousin to "really?"
and a distracted but slightly heavy sigh.
One out of every three or four emails at the company probably contain the word
"suck" and there are probably places where a change in the
coffee-making infrastructure was called "unworkable" in an attempt to
keep a particular brand of machine or coffee or coffee-creamer in vogue.
Not Use Java? Those Dastards! However shall we persevere within such draconian
missives from amongst our unnamed overlords! Heaven Forfend!
No really, that's what this email says (barring, of course, a huge appendix of
detailed technical analysis)...[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 09:03 PM EDT |
Indeed, he's not, he's a programmer. And not just any programmer, but an old
Sun hand who believes Java is the answer. Even ex-Sun folk like Simon
Phipps, who otherwise have their heads screwed on right, have clearly overly
imbibed the Java kool-aid.
Sadly, Google will probably not point this
out, since it could be taken as a criticism of Android.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: calris74 on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 09:36 PM EDT |
I thought the Sydney Morning Herald was better than this :(
Linkity Link
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 10:51 PM EDT |
Copyright? -- Nobody.
Impossible. Under the current system every napkin scribble is instantly
copyrighted upon creation. Does NO ONE on the jury know this?
Wow[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 11:28 PM EDT |
... Looking forward to it. They actually have a big
advantage, since they have
all afternoon and night to craft
it as a response. Also, their defence is more
solid than
what Oracle has shown as an offence.
It seems we also got
the answer to the copyright question...
the judge is waiting to see what is
being presented at trial
before deciding:
One of the issues the
judge will decide related
to copyright infringement. It is not only a legal
question
but it also depends on the act in the records of the trial,
therefore, you must prove it during the trial.
~cd[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: tknarr on Tuesday, April 17 2012 @ 02:56 AM EDT |
Java started work on "write once, run anywhere" in 1991,
according to Oracle.
Icon
was doing interpreted bytecode back in 1980. It was nice because we could
compile on any computer, take the "executable" to any other computer with
an Icon runtime, regardless of the type of system, and run it. The earliest
version in their historic directory is v2 for the VAX, from 1980. I worked with
Icon myself in the mid-80s when I was in college.
So no, Java was hardly
the first language to do "write once, run anywhere". Icon wasn't even the first,
UCSD pSystem Pascal was doing it before Icon. And Icon was doing implicit memory
management and garbage collection before Java, too. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Java first? No. - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 20 2012 @ 01:48 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: bugstomper on Tuesday, April 17 2012 @ 03:16 AM EDT |
Michael Jacobs said the Class libraries are the house, and the APIs are the
blueprint.
That is so not true! A blueprint is a detailed architectural drawing of the
plans for the house, with all parts and dimensions specified, sufficient to
allow builders to build the house. A blueprint can be protected by copyright (I
assume, but IANAL).
If the class libraries are the house, then the API would be more like a table of
information that might include the location of the house, as well as the
locations of the driveway, the front gate, the footpath from the front gate, the
front door, the side door, all the windows, etc. In other words the API would
contain all the information needed to access the house, without containing any
of the additional information that would be required to actually build the
house.
Again, IANAL, but it seems to me that such a list of facts would not be
copyrightable.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 17 2012 @ 03:51 AM EDT |
Now that's a crafty trick, until the Lindholm email is entered, the jury
will not know it was not written in 2005. Regardless of its utility
as evidence of anything.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 17 2012 @ 06:31 AM EDT |
Beware the trap of using the other guys munged terminology.
I've been following avidly Groklaws coverage ofthe dispute.
Please consider the following exerpts and note my added
words and emphasis, which I hope will clarify the seeming
contradiction.
Google, from pretrial brief: The opinion, however, uses
“interface” [instead of "API"] in two senses, first
referring to a file format ([ a *specification*] which it
concludes is an uncopyrightable idea) and later referring to
specific source code in a computer program, authored by the
developer, that implements a file format ([ an
implementation of a *specification* ] which it concludes may
be copyrighted). This is entirely consistent with Google’s
position.
Judge, first day of trial: We need a clear-cut way to use
terms, like *specification*. [ Is it a ] User manual or [a]
technical way in which it works which might not be [ a
particular copyrighted ] user manual. I urge you to be clear
with your vocabulary when you talk to the jury.
I hope Google's lawyer Robert van Nest finds every
opportunity to speak of functionally / API compatible
"Harmony" Libraries and the "Dalvik" virtual machine as
opposed to "Java" libraries and "Java" virtual machine.
Google eschewed the GPL'd material,the OpenJDK sources &
binaries and was not able to come to terms with SUN
regarding SUN's ( now Oracle America's ) API implementation
embodied by the "Java" libraries.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 17 2012 @ 06:38 AM EDT |
|
http://web.archive.org/web/20070611104244/
https://openjdk.dev.java.net/ has
the statement.
Note: Beware of the automatic redirect to a different page
that
does not. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Ian Al on Tuesday, April 17 2012 @ 07:16 AM EDT |
COURT:The delightful young Oracle lady is excused.
The app programmer is excused.
The business administrator is excused.
Take the patent lawyer out back.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 17 2012 @ 07:19 AM EDT |
From that reporter:
...
Plaintiff’s Opening
Statement:
...
Sun did not want to give a license on the terms Google
wanted because it was inconsistent with what they wanted. They had a choice, go
with Microsoft or employ Java anyway.
Michael Jacobs of MoFo
claimed Microsoft was the only coding alternative for Android?!? Where
did *that* come from? I don't recall reading anything anywhere that would even
hint Google considered that.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: lnuss on Tuesday, April 17 2012 @ 08:58 AM EDT |
Wow! What detailed reporting -- this is grand.
Thanks!!!
---
Larry N.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Ian Al on Tuesday, April 17 2012 @ 09:19 AM EDT |
I must remember that this is the reporter's summary of the opening statement and
not a verbatim transcript:
Java. What is it? This is a symbol for
Java. Java is a programming language. Also, application programming application
(API) and association class libraries.
The basic ideas of class
libraries is simple. If there are programs writing functions why do not we have
them write a code and put it in the library and have it prewritten and prevent
developers from writing a new code. APIs are blueprints. Class libraries are
code. Blueprints tell you how to navigate the complicated structure. We now need
to provide complicated class libraries on our machines. If all of that works and
libraries are consistent, Java will flourish and we all have a common
language.
I really want BitoBear to comment on 'Class libraries
are code'.
However, Jacobs has got the tech wrong. Programmers using
the Java language get access to functions useful for application programs by
using the methods [dictionary meaning] given in the Java API Specification. Each
API function has program code associated with it that actually delivers the
function that the interface method promises. Programmers compile their Java
application source code to produce a 'classfile' that can be used on any Java
Runtime Environment.
The above is exactly the same wherever Java
programs are executed. That is possible because the same virtual processor is
implemented in the Java Virtual Machine within the Java Runtime Environment on
each platform. It is the writing of the implementation of the JVM byte code
processor which changes from computer to computer.
I don't think Jacobs
knows the constitution, either.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the
United States Constitution,
To promote the Progress of Science and
useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the
exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.
It
is only when you look at the law that you find patents and
copyrights.
He made the following comment,By 2010, Lindholm
writes and says that they have no alternatives, to negotiate the license on the
terms they need.
Lindholm, Page, Brin, 1 week before this suit was filed,
realized they need to negotiate the license. They knew they do not have license
and they knew they needed to negotiate it.
And then the judge
follows up,JA to jurors: "Keep an open mind. None of the emails you
were shown have been entered into evidence."
That strikes me as
the judge pouring cold water over the key point in the opening statement.
Perhaps the judge remembers what Oracle said
to him, previously:
Google designed Android free from
constraint and could have done it in a way that didn't infringe. They chose to
use these technologies” [the API to leverage developers and create lots of apps,
and the patents to improve speed of loading and multitasking].
Android
product description in 2006 was shared with Sun during the negotiations over
licensing.
Judge: Are there any internal Google emails that show that
Google decided to infringe?
Oracle: Not as such, but Google did choose
to use the technology.
Judge: In 2006.
Oracle: Not all of
them [the patents]. The '104 yes, that was 2006.
Google: The argument
is circular, based on the patents they say were infringed. All Oracle [Sun] had
was the Product Description, which had no specifics regarding
technologies.
You might note that they made the decision to use
the copyrights on the very day that they decided to use the
patents.
And, what are we to make of By the time that
Google was looking at the the technology for Android, Java was huge - lots of
adoption and lots of Java developers. Java is widely deployed on "feature
phones".
I'm wondering on which featurephones Java is widely
deployed. I am unaware of any.
I am not convinced that Jacobs knows
this little. I think he is in serious trouble and has resorted to
misrepresenting the Java API Specification and the cleverness of the 'class
library code' to write once and run anywhere because otherwise his arguments
about the tremendous creative expression value in the Java API Specification
will be empty.
Remember that the information to jurors proposed by the
judge says that the Java API code is not at issue.
As for 'never mind
the quality of the law, feel the width of the Constitution' well, words fail
me!
How are the mighty fallen! I am both glad and
sad.---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: DannyB on Tuesday, April 17 2012 @ 09:30 AM EDT |
> I hope, personally, that Google find some alternative
> software or designs some and just works away from Java
> someday.
No disrespect, but you should know better.
Java is not the problem.
It doesn't matter what technology Google would use. Python. C/C++. Go / Dart,
or some other language of their very own creation. Java is a red herring.
Google would still be sued over patents, and possibly copyright. Microsoft
would find a patent. So would Apple. So would any other greedy party. Oracle.
Paul Allen. They would come crawling out of the woodwork as long as Google is
making gobs of money from innovation.
Others look at innovation and success and wish they had it. They even feel
entitled to it.
Apple would still sue Android OEM's over round rectangles. Or making tablets
that are *thin*. (gasp!) Imagine that! Or tablet interfaces that are
uncluttered. Apple actually told a court that Samsung could remedy their
infringing tablets by making the screen more cluttered or making the tablet less
thin. That's like suing over a sports car because it "goes fast" and
thus infringes our sports car. It should go less fast.
All that is necessary for Apple to succeed is for Google men to do nothing.
All that is necessary for Oracle to succeed is for Google men to do nothing.
---
The price of freedom is eternal litigation.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 17 2012 @ 09:36 AM EDT |
Oracle has posted the slides used in the opening statement at
http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/features/opening-slides-1592541.pdf .[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 17 2012 @ 10:20 AM EDT |
Would someone please explain to me how it is that
weather
APIs and computer
languages are copyrightable is a fact
question for a Jury? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jimrandomh on Tuesday, April 17 2012 @ 01:48 PM EDT |
I don't like how the only software engineer was excused. It seems like
"jury of peers" has morphed into "jury of everyone *except*
peers" (with
"we are all peers before the law" as an intermediate step). The
argument
is that domain knowledge would impair a juror's ability to be impartial,
but I believe the opposite is true: lack of technical background
drastically impairs jurors' ability to judge.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 17 2012 @ 02:38 PM EDT |
Great commen from Jan Wildeboer (Red Hat) on Google+:
Oracles Larry
Ellison in court today in the Android case:
"If people could copy
our software and create cheap
knockoffs of our products, we wouldn't get paid
for our
engineering and wouldn't be able to invest what we invest,
"
Ellison testified.
Me looks at Oracle Enterprise Linux and Red Hat and
starts
to laugh hysterically.
Jan
Wildeboer [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 18 2012 @ 04:46 AM EDT |
Answer: The GNU General Public License, a.k.a. the GPL!
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 18 2012 @ 02:07 PM EDT |
So here's an honest yet possibly naive question:<p>
How can you copyright a computer language? The languages draw so much from one
another and have historically done so that how could you not have languages that
don't infringe upon other languages? How much do modern computer languages owe
to Fortan, Algol, Smalltalk? What kind of avalanche of litigation would be
unleashed if one could copyright or patent a computer language?<p>[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
