8 ms·

>This coming from the company that files patents like crazy and gives out t-shirts that say “patent heroes wanted”. This is a complete red-herring. Patents are

>This coming from the company that files patents like crazy and gives out t-shirts that say “patent heroes wanted”. This is a complete red-herring. Patents are not what this case is about. Openness or cuddliness is not what this case is about. The reality is that Google is in the right because Oracle is willing to set fire to the norms and standards that were developed over the last 50 years just because they want to squeeze more money out of Java.

snarf21 7y ago
You can say it even more strongly. Oracle bought SUN with the sole intention of using it as the basis to sue Google. Full stop. This is a shakedown and Oracle needs to go away.
- pjmlp 7y ago
  Ah, and Google thought that Sun would sink and they could get away with screwing Sun. If Google was so interested in Java, they could have made a bid to own Java. Guess what, they would not have been sued and control its destiny. With Google at the steering wheel I bet Java developers would still be enjoying Java 6.
  - danShumway 7y ago
    The argument that Google deserves punishment because they didn't buy another company is not one I'm even remotely sympathetic to. The entire industry would be worse off today if our legal policy on APIs was, "they're copyrighted, but don't worry, you can just buy out companies you want to interop with." Imagine how much smaller and how much more uninteresting the tech world would be. Any company that wasn't the size of Google couldn't have bought Sun, and any company, even companies smaller than Google, should be free to interop with the Java APIs the same way that Google did. Discussions about whether or not Google could have bought Sun are meaningless to me, I don't think they have anything of value to add to the current case, and I don't think they have anything to do with Oracle buying Sun with the sole intention of suing someone else. You're replying to a thread where someone complains about Google excessively filing patents as a defensive/offensive measure, and your argument is that Google should also be excessively buying companies as a defensive measure against lawsuits?
    - pjmlp 7y ago
      Yes I am, if Google was honest regarding Java they should have acquired the language stewardship. I work mostly with commercial software, so IP and patents are business as usual. Maybe even this would finally provide a way for many freetards to actually pay for the tooling they use.
      - jcranmer 7y ago
        So, in your opinion, WINE is an illegal software product, and Microsoft should sue them into oblivion. And IBM should sue everybody else for copying the BIOS interface. And Amazon should sue Oracle for implementing the AWS APIs. If you believe that Oracle deserves to win this case, those are requisite outcomes of the case, because Oracle's legal contention is that merely providing an independent implementation of the API is copyright infringement.
        pjmlp 7y ago
        I never cared for WINE, and Microsoft doesn't take that path just because they don't care about WINE. After all, when it is the year of Desktop Linux actually? IBM tried to sue everybody, they just lost the case because Compaq was clever doing a clean room reverse engineering. https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/news/how-compaqs-clone-computers-skirted-ibms-patents-and-gave-rise-to-eisa/ https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/news/how-compaqs-clone-comp... > Their first attack came in the form of lawyers using 9,000 IBM copyrights in the hope that Compaq had broken just one. Luckily for IBM, Compaq did break one copyright, which forced them into a corner. Compaq negotiated with IBM and ended up purchasing the copyright for $130 million. This, however, did not stop Compaq overall. Google lacked the cleverness from Compaq.
        jcranmer 7y ago
        Google also did a clean room reverse engineering. Or at least clean enough that the jury voted to acquit Google of copying the Java source code, and Oracle has not appealed that claim--meaning Oracle concedes that at this point. The only thing that Oracle claims Google has done at this point is copied the API, which anyone who wishes to do a clean room reverse engineering would also have to do. Oracle is trying to get a judgement that makes such clean room reverse engineering impossible, which is why everyone else is freaking out about this case and asking SCOTUS to reverse CAFC and Oracle here.
  - macspoofing 7y ago
    >With Google at the steering wheel I bet Java developers would still be enjoying Java 6. Maybe. Maybe not. But just to be clear, if all this case was about was Oracle trying to extract some money from Google, it would be nothing but a curious sideshow. What Oracle is doing goes way beyond Java. They are trying to set an insane precedent and that has never existed in our industry, and had it existed it would have drastically reshaped it to the extent that it would be unrecognizable today. The implications of Oracle winning would be far reaching and unknown.

snarf21 7y ago

You can say it even more strongly. Oracle bought SUN with the sole intention of using it as the basis to sue Google. Full stop. This is a shakedown and Oracle needs to go away.

pjmlp 7y ago
Ah, and Google thought that Sun would sink and they could get away with screwing Sun. If Google was so interested in Java, they could have made a bid to own Java. Guess what, they would not have been sued and control its destiny. With Google at the steering wheel I bet Java developers would still be enjoying Java 6.
- danShumway 7y ago
  The argument that Google deserves punishment because they didn't buy another company is not one I'm even remotely sympathetic to. The entire industry would be worse off today if our legal policy on APIs was, "they're copyrighted, but don't worry, you can just buy out companies you want to interop with." Imagine how much smaller and how much more uninteresting the tech world would be. Any company that wasn't the size of Google couldn't have bought Sun, and any company, even companies smaller than Google, should be free to interop with the Java APIs the same way that Google did. Discussions about whether or not Google could have bought Sun are meaningless to me, I don't think they have anything of value to add to the current case, and I don't think they have anything to do with Oracle buying Sun with the sole intention of suing someone else. You're replying to a thread where someone complains about Google excessively filing patents as a defensive/offensive measure, and your argument is that Google should also be excessively buying companies as a defensive measure against lawsuits?
  - pjmlp 7y ago
    Yes I am, if Google was honest regarding Java they should have acquired the language stewardship. I work mostly with commercial software, so IP and patents are business as usual. Maybe even this would finally provide a way for many freetards to actually pay for the tooling they use.
    - jcranmer 7y ago
      So, in your opinion, WINE is an illegal software product, and Microsoft should sue them into oblivion. And IBM should sue everybody else for copying the BIOS interface. And Amazon should sue Oracle for implementing the AWS APIs. If you believe that Oracle deserves to win this case, those are requisite outcomes of the case, because Oracle's legal contention is that merely providing an independent implementation of the API is copyright infringement.
      - pjmlp 7y ago
        I never cared for WINE, and Microsoft doesn't take that path just because they don't care about WINE. After all, when it is the year of Desktop Linux actually? IBM tried to sue everybody, they just lost the case because Compaq was clever doing a clean room reverse engineering. https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/news/how-compaqs-clone-computers-skirted-ibms-patents-and-gave-rise-to-eisa/ https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/news/how-compaqs-clone-comp... > Their first attack came in the form of lawyers using 9,000 IBM copyrights in the hope that Compaq had broken just one. Luckily for IBM, Compaq did break one copyright, which forced them into a corner. Compaq negotiated with IBM and ended up purchasing the copyright for $130 million. This, however, did not stop Compaq overall. Google lacked the cleverness from Compaq.
        jcranmer 7y ago
        Google also did a clean room reverse engineering. Or at least clean enough that the jury voted to acquit Google of copying the Java source code, and Oracle has not appealed that claim--meaning Oracle concedes that at this point. The only thing that Oracle claims Google has done at this point is copied the API, which anyone who wishes to do a clean room reverse engineering would also have to do. Oracle is trying to get a judgement that makes such clean room reverse engineering impossible, which is why everyone else is freaking out about this case and asking SCOTUS to reverse CAFC and Oracle here.
- macspoofing 7y ago
  >With Google at the steering wheel I bet Java developers would still be enjoying Java 6. Maybe. Maybe not. But just to be clear, if all this case was about was Oracle trying to extract some money from Google, it would be nothing but a curious sideshow. What Oracle is doing goes way beyond Java. They are trying to set an insane precedent and that has never existed in our industry, and had it existed it would have drastically reshaped it to the extent that it would be unrecognizable today. The implications of Oracle winning would be far reaching and unknown.