3 ms·
I'm trying to understand what was copied by Google. Did they copy the core class names and the different method and attribute names for these objects but rewro
by wuliwong 7y ago
I'm trying to understand what was copied by Google.
Did they copy the core class names and the different method and attribute names for these objects but rewrote everything else from scratch?
I dont know java but but lets say it was ruby and then i made xruby and copied the same type of things. So, Random.rand (in xruby) still produced a similar random Float like in ruby. But the code that was called by Random.rand was entirely written by me from scratch? Is that the idea?
- orthoxerox 7y agoImagine Ruby was closed source, but you were allowed to make open source implementations that ran Ruby programs. Then you implement a language called Crystal that uses Ruby syntax and its stdlib looks a lot like Ruby's, but it can't run Rails because it's designed for car navigators, not webapps. The Ruby Company comes after you and says that if you wanted to reuse their APIs you should've bought a license.
- wuliwong 7y agoInteresting. I was thinking it was like google copy and pasted oracle's code, kept the function definitions and then re-wrote the innards. To me if code is truly treated as a literary work then it doesn't really matter how the end product behaves. It matters whether the text was copied. In the case of ruby vs crystal, I think the courts will rule on the side of crystal!
- __david__ 7y agoYes, that is exactly it.