3 ms·

And the opportunity for a shit ton of lawsuits. Source code like this doesn’t just have no value for Google. It has negative value. It’s a massive liability.

And the opportunity for a shit ton of lawsuits. Source code like this doesn’t just have no value for Google. It has negative value. It’s a massive liability. That’s why big cos simply bury source code instead of releasing it in the open.

adastra22 2y ago
Liability for what?
- zinekeller 2y ago
  Unrelated to smartwatches, but the usual reason that I've heard on why video drivers are not open-sourced directly (AMDGPU =/= AMDGPU PRO and Nvidia's recent parallel driver efforts) is that there are copyright (old code that is not written by ATI/AMD or Nvidia/3dfx and AMD/Nvidia not getting the rights to it) and patent (techniques used may be patented by their competitors) concerns.
  - adastra22 2y ago
    For that to be an issue here, there would have to be revenue from the Pebble line of products. Otherwise how would they show monetary loss?
    - arghwhat 2y ago
      They have had revenue as pebble sold their smartwatches. Acquisition includes liability. You do not need revenue to be liable though.
      - adastra22 2y ago
        The statute of limitations is 3 years for copyright infringement and 6 years for patents. The plaintiff would have to show actual financial loss due to the infringement. In the case of the pebble assets, that seems exceedingly unlikely. Generously assume for the sake of argument that the entire codebase is a straight up copy of Samsung and Apple’s IP. What damages have been caused by that IP sitting dormant on Google’s hard drives for the past six years?
        zinekeller 2y ago
        > The statute of limitations is 3 years for copyright infringement ... nope. Not even in the US, where "3 years" as you claim is from the possible discovery date, not the infrigment date (https://www.michaelbest.com/Newsroom/340003/US-Supreme-Court-Revises-3-Year-Statute-of-Limitations-for-Copyright-Infringement-Damages https://www.michaelbest.com/Newsroom/340003/US-Supreme-Court...), and this would probably only accrue when the source code is released (as it can be argued that it would be difficult to see a more subtle copyright infrigment on object code). Also statutory damages exists, so even for no revenue there is a reasonable possibility that they will be sued for that alone (similar to how game and music piracy lawsuits work). > and 6 years for patents Other jurisdictions like Germany (no limits) exists.

adastra22 2y ago

Liability for what?

zinekeller 2y ago
Unrelated to smartwatches, but the usual reason that I've heard on why video drivers are not open-sourced directly (AMDGPU =/= AMDGPU PRO and Nvidia's recent parallel driver efforts) is that there are copyright (old code that is not written by ATI/AMD or Nvidia/3dfx and AMD/Nvidia not getting the rights to it) and patent (techniques used may be patented by their competitors) concerns.
- adastra22 2y ago
  For that to be an issue here, there would have to be revenue from the Pebble line of products. Otherwise how would they show monetary loss?
  - arghwhat 2y ago
    They have had revenue as pebble sold their smartwatches. Acquisition includes liability. You do not need revenue to be liable though.
    - adastra22 2y ago
      The statute of limitations is 3 years for copyright infringement and 6 years for patents. The plaintiff would have to show actual financial loss due to the infringement. In the case of the pebble assets, that seems exceedingly unlikely. Generously assume for the sake of argument that the entire codebase is a straight up copy of Samsung and Apple’s IP. What damages have been caused by that IP sitting dormant on Google’s hard drives for the past six years?
      - zinekeller 2y ago
        > The statute of limitations is 3 years for copyright infringement ... nope. Not even in the US, where "3 years" as you claim is from the possible discovery date, not the infrigment date (https://www.michaelbest.com/Newsroom/340003/US-Supreme-Court-Revises-3-Year-Statute-of-Limitations-for-Copyright-Infringement-Damages https://www.michaelbest.com/Newsroom/340003/US-Supreme-Court...), and this would probably only accrue when the source code is released (as it can be argued that it would be difficult to see a more subtle copyright infrigment on object code). Also statutory damages exists, so even for no revenue there is a reasonable possibility that they will be sued for that alone (similar to how game and music piracy lawsuits work). > and 6 years for patents Other jurisdictions like Germany (no limits) exists.