az226

24 ms·

421.
by az226 4y ago
It’s free for open source maintainers.
422.
by az226 5y ago
They absolutely care about revenue, but in the early innings it is not AS important. Strategic value is essentially enterprise value you haven’t quantified yet.
423.
by az226 5y ago
Emeritus Chair
424.
by az226 6y ago
Already before this received two months pay and now also has job offered back
425.
by az226 6y ago
And the justices picked up on that. I thought they did a good job assessing the case from both ends. At first I thought the justices were against Google and pro Oracle, until I saw them address the Oracle lawyer and it was clear they were a
426.
by az226 6y ago
News at 11, they did. In seriousness, they didn’t copy the libraries just once, but at least 3 times over time as Oracle continued to make investments in changes and additions to the libraries.
427.
by az226 6y ago
I see your point. But because it would be interoperable with the developers and not the end users, so it’s still no dice for Google. The QWERTY keyboard is a good example of interoperability with end users (but not of copyright itself). So
428.
by az226 6y ago
Fair enough. The decision to allow someone else to copy the code should be up to the owner and not be given away. Also copyright protections aren’t given up because it makes a third party’s life easier. That’s also what was said during the
429.
by az226 6y ago
As I said, Google could have created new packages with the same functionality, but they didn’t. They copied Oracle’s Java libraries exactly. Even if you reimplement the implementing code, you’ve still copied a lot from the creative expressi
430.
by az226 6y ago
Google would lose if they would continue hammering the interop point and the justices would dig deeper. Google only copied a selective set of Oracle's Java libraries. If they were about interop, they would have copied all of them. So n
431.
by az226 6y ago
Oracle had asked for a sum that was super reasonable and Google decided to roll the dice instead. Incredibly foolish. In the grand scheme, what's a $10B fine on a business worth hundreds of billions. Google had to get to market fast an
432.
by az226 6y ago
Couldn't edit my comment above to add: The interoperability argument is also disingenuous because Google didn't copy all of Oracle's Java libraries. It only copied the ones it deemed necessary to provide sufficient coverage f
433.
by az226 6y ago
He also argued that there was only one way Oracle's Java libraries could have been designed, which is clearly false, and the justices picked up on that.
434.
by az226 6y ago
The reason we have copyright protections to begin with is to reward and incentivize creation of new creative works with intellectual property protections. If you spent a large amount of resources in creating the library of Java code, why sh