decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Off Topic | 80 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections
Authored by: jezevans on Monday, June 03 2013 @ 04:56 AM EDT
Please post corrections here.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Newspicks
Authored by: jezevans on Monday, June 03 2013 @ 04:58 AM EDT
Please post newspicks here with a link to the story.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off Topic
Authored by: jezevans on Monday, June 03 2013 @ 04:59 AM EDT
Please put off topic posts here and, if possible, give some links

[ Reply to This | # ]

Comes
Authored by: jezevans on Monday, June 03 2013 @ 05:00 AM EDT
Put Comes posts here, you wonderful people.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Should Be Java vs. Dalvik, Not Java vs. Android
Authored by: lnuss on Monday, June 03 2013 @ 07:54 AM EDT
"It keeps saying that Java and Android are not fullly compatible."

And there, to me, is another part of the confusion. Without Dalvik in Android
Oracle would have nothing to complain about.
It seems to me that this incompatibility complaint should always mention Dalvik,
rather than Android. But Oracle keeps pushing it this way and everyone else
seems to follow along, mostly.

---
Larry N.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Amicus Brief of Intellectual Property Law Professors in Support of Google and Affirmance ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 03 2013 @ 08:26 AM EDT
So google has amicus briefs from leading computing scientists. The whol app
developer association and IP Law professors.

Meanwhile Oracle has amicus briefs from Microsoft and Nokia (Microsoft), I
guess.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Incremental fix or apocaliptic crash
Authored by: BsAtHome on Monday, June 03 2013 @ 08:28 AM EDT
After looking through both the copyright and patent (troll-)wars playing out,
where parties try to extend their leverage to the max for the sake of killing
competition or outright blackmail, I think there are two possibilities.
One, you can fix the governing laws to make the system sensible again, or two,
you can extend the laws to create a complete system's crash.

The first approach has been very very slow and has not seen any real progress in
addressing the problem for the past 10..15 years. That would suggest that small
adaptive fixes are not working as they should.

The second approach, with help from the courts and lawmakers(/lobbyists), would
create a setting where about anything you do is illegal and a minefield is laid
out across the entire working area. Anybody can "kill" anybody for
about any inferior infraction (just typing the letter 'A' may be enough).

After some thought, I have come to the conclusion that it might be time to let
both the copyright and patent system collapse in a big crash with a huge
mushroom cloud. Let Oracle win this case and nobody, really nobody, can write
one line of code anymore in the US without being killed off for writing it. It
will make the system come to a complete standstill and make the problem truly
visible. The same for the patent system; let everybody patent the wheel and the
+-operator over and over again. Nobody can make anything without being liable. A
complete standstill is the consequence, and again, the problem will be truly
visible.

When _everybody_ becomes an infringer, revolution will result and nobody will
care anymore. If the system is completely unjust, the system will become
obsolete.

---
SCOop of the day

[ Reply to This | # ]

Amicus Brief of Intellectual Property Law Professors in Support of Google and Affirmance ~pj
Authored by: ukjaybrat on Monday, June 03 2013 @ 08:36 AM EDT
With so many people speaking out on Google' behalf and/or
against Oracle, what are the chances this just gets swept
under the rug rather quickly instead of being drawn out over
the rest of the year and wasting time and money better spent
on something else?

---
IANAL

[ Reply to This | # ]

Could someone give us a layperson's guide to Amicus Briefs and a Judges response
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 03 2013 @ 10:36 AM EDT

Because I know this has been discussed, but it has been a long time, and
I'd really like an update.

Wayne
http://madhatter.ca

[ Reply to This | # ]

Oracle's pattern of bad behavior
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 03 2013 @ 12:40 PM EDT
Their antics with the Java API, attempting to take what was relatively open and
make it proprietary, is not dissimilar to what it has done with MySQL.

I think it's too bad that MySQL wasn't similarly reverse-engineered by Google so
that it also could be subject of Oracle's lawsuit - it would have given Google
and the world the opportunity to tell Oracle where to stuff it as regards their
heavy-handed redist-support licensing scheme for MySQL, which has driven at
least one company to drop support for MySQL as a DB option for their products -
in favor of, of all things, Microsoft's freebie version of MSSQL.

It's telling when a Microsoft "freebie" has more-favorable
redist-support licensing than what used to be the FOSS de-facto standard DB.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Amicus Brief of Intellectual Property Law Professors in Support of Google and Affirmance ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 03 2013 @ 12:59 PM EDT
Should apply to procedures, processes, systems, or methods of operation? Sounds
great to me! But it also means, if this is recognized, that software itself is
not eligible for copyright protection. And as we already agree that it's not
eligible for being patented, then that strips away ALL protection from
software.

This would be a great day indeed. DMCA would not extend to pirated and
hacked/cracked software so long as all "art" has been removed and
replaced with something else and all other brandings removed as well.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )