3 ms·
From the dissent: "Instead of creating its own declaring code—as Apple and Microsoft chose to do— Google copied verbatim 11,500 lines of Oracle’s declaring co
by chmod600 6y ago
From the dissent:
"Instead of creating its
own declaring code—as Apple and Microsoft chose to do—
Google copied verbatim 11,500 lines of Oracle’s declaring
code and arranged that code exactly as Oracle had done."
I didn't read the whole opinion, but what is Google's excuse for this? If there's one way to do it, I don't think copyright should apply. But when there's more than one way, why should copyright not provide some protection? I guess just because it's tiny and contains little expression?
Regardless, it seems like very poor judgement to not do a cleanroom implementation here.
- Google234 6y agoThat’s the API? You can’t clean room that without having a different API.
- arduinomancer 6y agoThe 11,500 lines is the API interface, so just the function/class signatures. They _did_ do a cleanroom implementation, that's the whole issue that makes it an interesting case: are APIs fair use?
- chmod600 6y agoWhy did it have to be a verbatim copy rather than just a very similar API spec?
- arduinomancer 6y agoBecause you wouldn’t be able to run your existing Java code on their VM? The whole point was interoperability