|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 23 2012 @ 03:55 AM EDT |
Sure, that's what I said: the one protection mechanism that is not totally
contrary to what an API is supposed to be is patents. Oracle has lost its
marbles on the patent front and now is dragging copyrights into the ring.
And those don't fit. You can try making a side pot from them and make a bit of
small cash. Instead Oracle tries selling them off as the "real deal"
of the acquisition.
What corporations don't get is that the real deal here was not in the form of
patents. Or in the form of copyright.
It was in the form of a thriving development department, employees organized to
do their job well and be creative.
The fundamental purpose of a car is to go places, not to be an inventory of car
parts.
If you treat them as the latter, the cars will lose value faster than you can
look since they won't be useful for their purpose anymore.
And it is not the job of courts and patent and copyright laws to substitute for
business ineptitude. If you sell the brakes of your car and drive it against a
tree, then sue the tree owner for the loss of value due to the damaged grill
which was "really" the only thing you wanted the car for...[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|