|
|
|
| Authored by: sproggit on Friday, April 20 2012 @ 06:36 PM EDT |
Not only do I agree with you, I think there is a growing body of evidence that
supports you.
If you look at our reports from the court this week, you will see some subtle
shifts and game-play by Oracle.
They are conflating different aspects of JAVA (the definition of the standard,
the implementation of programs written in JAVA and the JAVA APIs) to confuse the
jury. They are shifting their arguments in an attempt to find something that
will stick.
But it all comes down to one thing: Google have never claimed that Android was
JAVA, just that it uses a JAVA-like syntax.
Well... I am a big fan of writing in PHP, and I have to tell you, more than 80%
of PHP shares syntax with JAVA. It's implemented differently, of course, and the
differences increase as you get to the libraries, but loop statements,
conditional statements, they all share syntax. Not because PHP copied JAVA, but
because they both come from a common parent - ANSI C. The ANSI bit is useful -
the American National Standards Institute - will help make it harder for anyone
to claim intellectual property rights over the ancestry of any of these C-like
languages.
Basically, this entire case boils down to 9 lines of code, for which Google have
apologized and removed, the moment they knew that it had been placed there
inappropriately. That's hardly willful infringement, is it?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
