3 ms·

> That said, this case does establish a precedent that if your copying of an API is primarily for purposes of matching an interface so that developers can reimp

> That said, this case does establish a precedent that if your copying of an API is primarily for purposes of matching an interface so that developers can reimplement it, you're in fair use territory: >> Google copied these lines not because of their creativity or beauty but because they would allow programmers to bring their skills to a new smartphone computing environment. It's even weaker than you think. It was important that Google's use of Java's API was on a non-competing product. It's still quite up in the air what happens if you provide a generic library using your competitor's API without licensing it from them.

sesuximo 6y ago
The dissent point out “non-competing” is a bit of a stretch as this affected contracts oracle had.
- notsureaboutpg 6y ago
  The dissent really made me think that, as the law stands, Google is in the wrong here, and what everyone is really trying to do is figure out how to allow copying / reimplementing APIs since that probably makes business / programming / innovation easier.
extropy 6y ago
How is J2ME not competing?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- monocasa 6y ago
  Because A) J2ME targeted feature phones. B) Google isn't accused of copying J2ME when you get down to it. The parts that make ME distinct from SE weren't reimplemented in Android's Harmony fork (looking strongly at javax.microedition), and a lot of packages that SE implemented that ME didn't were present in Android.
sizt 6y ago
It's called opcodes. AMD has been copying Intel's opcodes for decades. Just like Oracle copied IBM's SQL commands. This lawsuit was a sham from the beginning. Larry Ellison should be ashamed of himself for bringing it in the first place. If Oracle had won, AT&T could have sued Oracle to remove all C language commands from the Oracle DB source code. Larry was genuinely stupid to sue Google over the Java "API" in addition to being a world-class hypocrite.

sesuximo 6y ago

The dissent point out “non-competing” is a bit of a stretch as this affected contracts oracle had.

notsureaboutpg 6y ago
The dissent really made me think that, as the law stands, Google is in the wrong here, and what everyone is really trying to do is figure out how to allow copying / reimplementing APIs since that probably makes business / programming / innovation easier.

extropy 6y ago

How is J2ME not competing?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
monocasa 6y ago
Because A) J2ME targeted feature phones. B) Google isn't accused of copying J2ME when you get down to it. The parts that make ME distinct from SE weren't reimplemented in Android's Harmony fork (looking strongly at javax.microedition), and a lot of packages that SE implemented that ME didn't were present in Android.

sizt 6y ago

It's called opcodes. AMD has been copying Intel's opcodes for decades. Just like Oracle copied IBM's SQL commands. This lawsuit was a sham from the beginning. Larry Ellison should be ashamed of himself for bringing it in the first place. If Oracle had won, AT&T could have sued Oracle to remove all C language commands from the Oracle DB source code. Larry was genuinely stupid to sue Google over the Java "API" in addition to being a world-class hypocrite.