4 ms·
You might want to take a look at some of the pieces of code examined in Google vs Oracle before you decide small and obvious cannot bear copyright in the way th
by shakna 4y ago
You might want to take a look at some of the pieces of code examined in Google vs Oracle before you decide small and obvious cannot bear copyright in the way that you think it does.
That horrifying back and forth showed that lawyers can consider very small and obvious fragments of code to be absolutely copyrightable. And that it went on for nearly a decade, should tell you that none of this is simple.
- reidjs 4y agoCan you give an example? Are they trademarking `for` loops or something?
- jpollock 4y agohttps://guides.lib.umich.edu/c.php?g=791114&p=5747565 https://guides.lib.umich.edu/c.php?g=791114&p=5747565 "Google also copied the nine-line rangeCheck function in its implementing code" Comparison between the two, discussed back in 2012: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3940683 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3940683
- int_19h 4y agoGoogle v. Oracle did not decide whether such code is copyrightable. The decision says that it doesn't matter because it would be fair use if it were copyrightable.