|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 23 2012 @ 10:22 AM EDT |
Looks to me like a straightforward, "I found this potential precedent, is
it applicable to this case, and why or why not?", but in a more
focused/structured way.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 23 2012 @ 10:28 AM EDT |
But Google's citing of this case is also out of left field -
it is irrelevant: about intermediate copying of a program,
not actual copying and distribution of an API. They should be
citing "Lexmark Int'l v. Static Control Components" where
there was actual copying (in entirety) and distribution of
program object code, which was ruled fair use because there
was no other way to make compatible ink cartridges. Although
even that case isn't directly relevant because it is object
code, not the API that was copied.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 23 2012 @ 11:28 AM EDT |
I'm too lazy right now to go read through all the prior API
copyright briefs to verify this, but I'm pretty sure that
Google has raised (and Oracle responded on) Sony v.
Connectix is prior briefs. I don't think this is that out of
left field, for that reason: I think the judge is looking to
have the parties elaborate on the arguments about how that
case relates or doesn't to the facts in this case
(particularly, he wants Google to flesh out the argument
that it is controlling, and Oracle to flesh out the argument
that it should be distinguished.)
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: tknarr on Wednesday, May 23 2012 @ 01:12 PM EDT |
That case is IIRC the first one that ruled on the question of "Can party A
reverse-engineer party B's stuff and create their own version of software that
exposes to the world the same interface as party B's stuff?". It pre-dates the
IBM vs. Phoenix BIOS ruling, and was one of the cases cited to support the
proposition that IBM couldn't prevent anyone from implementing their own BIOS as
long as they didn't copy IBM's actual code. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
