or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google found distributing Oracle's Java code within Android project
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google found distributing Oracle's Java code within Android project - Page 5

post #161 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by dualaub2006 View Post

Dan, with all of the Google hate when do you post the article taking Apple Insider to task for having Evo, Xoom and Chrome ads running on the site? I mean, if Google is the enemy and Android is an evil ripoff of iOS then why run ads for their stuff right?



Google is NOT AI's enemy. Google is AI's customer. Google gives money to AI. In exchange, AI sells us readers to Google. AI gets Google Money every time we click. More and more. I think that is a good thing.

If not for Google, sites like AI would dry up and blow away. AI owes perhaps its very existence to Google.

AI takes the Google Money, and gives part of it to Daniel. I am not surprised that Daniel talks big. The fact is, however, that he eats using Google's Money.
post #162 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

I don't even know what MMAPI is.

The code I looked at, supposedly debunked as a unit test was part of JAVA.Security.

More to come.

For the MMAPI please look at
http://java.sun.com/products/mmapi/overview.html

It provides an interface for audio/video capabilities of JAVAME. This version of Java is aimed at embedded systems, which can include mobile phones.

For the time being Android does not support MMAPI. I have a feeling that they want to role out their own multimedia layer, which kind of makes sense. Saying all that, other files are more interesting.
post #163 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by tawilson View Post

I don't believe there has to be anything wilful about copyright infringement, I think you're confusing copyright and patent infringement.

That fact remains that Google released proprietary Oracle/Sun source code when they were not authorised to do so.

Sure it does. Damages are based on whether or not it was intentional. You familiar with the Microsoft case with MP3 patents?

I can host music on my computer all I want; until someone downloads it from me no infringement took place. If their server logs show only internal people got it or even like 10 people so what? An RIAA suit can make a person's life miserable; Google isn't exactly poor, and Oracle isn't going to get anything significant without any of the code being distributed on any android device.
post #164 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by HIMOKO View Post

I'm ALREADY AT HOME, Idiot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WhatEver MUCH Ya Defend Google, In Vain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You Can NOT Avoid Google's " Demise " which HAS ALREADY BEGUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Right. You can take that literally if it makes you feel better.

If Google loses then so does Apple due to software patents. Cuts both ways bud. Can't root for one without the other.
post #165 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeCallMe...Tim View Post

Google is NOT AI's enemy. Google is AI's customer. Google gives money to AI. In exchange, AI sells us readers to Google. AI gets Google Money every time we click. More and more. I think that is a good thing.

If not for Google, sites like AI would dry up and blow away. AI owes perhaps its very existence to Google.

AI takes the Google Money, and gives part of it to Daniel. I am not surprised that Daniel talks big. The fact is, however, that he eats using Google's Money.

Google also benefits from iOS. You think Google wants to kill iOS? They don't really care; they get money either way.

Not as much you say? Sure. But it still benefits them and they aren't going to mess up that relationship.

Even Apple was smart enough not to sue Google, but by proxy HTC.
post #166 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

If Google loses then so does Apple due to software patents. Cuts both ways bud. Can't root for one without the other.

You are assuming that Apple will come up on the short end.

Apple is already the most-sued company in the Valley. A few more suits is not going to be of much consequence. Besides, Apple does okay with these suits: win some, lose some and most get settled out of court.
post #167 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Definitely agree -- plus change the article headline to say: Wild-Ass-Claim - Update 1, Wild-Ass-Claim - Update 2, etc.

Thanks

I'm trying to be balanced and impartial on this one because it's such a grey area at the moment - at least until we receive more information.

From experience I'd say a lot of large projects would be on the wrong side of some kind of licensing or copyright agreement. Not through any kind of malicious intent but plain old neglect (e.g. some project managers take a "we'll deal with that stuff later" approach as they focus on functionality or bug fixes)

Unfortunately for Google having Android open source opens them up to more scrutiny than some other projects would see. Not to say it's ok to steal code, it's not, and I'm sure that if Google have done something wrong here then the courts will make them pay their dues.

It's hard to see this killing, or even hurting Android though- at least with the information we have at the moment. The worst case scenario seems to be that it might hurt Google's bottom line for a few years.
post #168 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sensi View Post

[

AppleInsider prefers to post 0-day debunked fairy tales about Android rather than reporting about something like the new proprietary screws put on Apple's devices, strange isn't it?

IMO, they should post both the fairy tales and the too-typical "Apple Screws (pun fully intended) Consumers Again" stories too.

And all the rest. It all makes for fun reading.
post #169 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by penchanted View Post

You are assuming that Apple will come up on the short end.

Apple is already the most-sued company in the Valley. A few more suits is not going to be of much consequence. Besides, Apple does okay with these suits: win some, lose some and most get settled out of court.

Regardless of whether or not they lose, they lose money on lawyers. Supporting software patents hurts everyone, not just Google or Apple.
post #170 of 278
Well, those who can, do. Those who can't?!?! well they obviously fucking steal it then 'give it away'. Google are out to sell your shit and really shouldn't be trusted. Whether its scanning your emails, recording your browsing habits, capturing your access point details or just simple IP theft they really can't be trusted.
post #171 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

Google also benefits from iOS. You think Google wants to kill iOS? They don't really care; they get money either way.

Not as much you say? Sure. But it still benefits them and they aren't going to mess up that relationship.

Even Apple was smart enough not to sue Google, but by proxy HTC.

Um, no you are wrong.
I hardly use Google now, just Google Maps, as there is no good alternative, hopefully Apple will remedy this in the future.
I use blekko as my search engine now, does not DO EVIL !
I don't use the default search engine on my iPhone or iPad.
So you see with a little bit of effort and some luck, I can completely break away from the Evil Empire.
post #172 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

Thanks

I'm trying to be balanced and impartial on this one because it's such a grey area at the moment - at least until we receive more information.

From experience I'd say a lot of large projects would be on the wrong side of some kind of licensing or copyright agreement. Not through any kind of malicious intent but plain old neglect (e.g. some project managers take a "we'll deal with that stuff later" approach as they focus on functionality or bug fixes)

Unfortunately for Google having Android open source opens them up to more scrutiny than some other projects would see. Not to say it's ok to steal code, it's not, and I'm sure that if Google have done something wrong here then the courts will make them pay their dues.

It's hard to see this killing, or even hurting Android though- at least with the information we have at the moment. The worst case scenario seems to be that it might hurt Google's bottom line for a few years.

The classic response from a troll.
Blame others for doing the same, just to try and hide Google's blatant steal.
I love you guys lol ! You are so funny.
post #173 of 278
how long before they all pull back from android
maybe another reason VZ wanted the iphone and is heavily advertising
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
post #174 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

Regardless of whether or not they lose, they lose money on lawyers. Supporting software patents hurts everyone, not just Google or Apple.

The lawyers definitely cost money which translates into a higher price for everyone. However, software patents are unlikely to disappear anytime soon.

What would make a difference in all civil cases is if there were "loser pays" rules; this would discourage frivolous lawsuits.
post #175 of 278
When a company proclaims to be better than all the others, with the mantra "DO NO EVIL", then goes out and does the following:
1) Blatantly steal people's confidential data from their street view skimmers
2) Use other companies (i.e. Apple) as their own personal R&D establishment
3) Attempt to push their web standards onto others
4) Read confidential emails and bombard those people with targeted ads
5) Store all your searches and pushes them onto the NSA
6) Bullying smaller companies

Then one has to take anything they say with a "grain of salt".
Slowly M$ is dying, as people at long last have realised that there are better alternatives out there, the same will happen with Google.
Lets start by killing it very easily, don't use Google search, try any others, such as blekko (I have no tie in with them, I just happen to like using it and they DO NO EVIL).
If blekko goes down the evil path, I will immediately use another search engine.
If we all do this, Google will go under very quickly, so if you hate Google or don't trust them, then do something about it.
I have been nuts in the past using them, I will do my best to not use them again.
Imagine no Google search, man this will destroy them, as its their main business model.
post #176 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by White Rabbit View Post

Um, no you are wrong.
I hardly use Google now, just Google Maps, as there is no good alternative, hopefully Apple will remedy this in the future.
I use blekko as my search engine now, does not DO EVIL !
I don't use the default search engine on my iPhone or iPad.
So you see with a little bit of effort and some luck, I can completely break away from the Evil Empire.

Uh, that wasn't my point to begin with; that's a strawman.

If you really believe what you say, you wouldn't use google maps, regardless of how good it is.

blekko does no evil? Let's see how that pans out if they get popular.
post #177 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by White Rabbit View Post

When a company proclaims to be better than all the others, with the mantra "DO NO EVIL", then goes out and does the following:
1) Blatantly steal people's confidential data from their street view skimmers
2) Use other companies (i.e. Apple) as their own personal R&D establishment
3) Attempt to push their web standards onto others
4) Read confidential emails and bombard those people with targeted ads
5) Store all your searches and pushes them onto the NSA
6) Bullying smaller companies

Then one has to take anything YOU say with a "grain of salt".

1. You might want to know what the word "confidential" means.
2. Absolutely no proof on that whatsoever.
3. How? If you are what I think you are referring to, no one is forcing you to drop h.264 for webm.
4. Then don't use gmail. No one is forcing you to use it. By the way, it's kinda hard to get targeted ads from google when you use their IMAP service.
5. And you think the NSA needs google for that? LOL
6. Uh oh, I'm sure Google is the only one.

Quote:
f we all do this, Google will go under very quickly, so if you hate Google or don't trust them, then do something about it.
I have been nuts in the past using them, I will do my best to not use them again.
Imagine no Google search, man this will destroy them, as its their main business model.

How's that ebay boycott going? How is the FSF boycott on evil apple working?
post #178 of 278
Getting a free Android operating system for free is too good to be true. All iPhone imitators never realize there is a hidden cost for free things. Just like having free sex and getting a bundle of hurts in the bargain.
post #179 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by veblen View Post

Everything I'm reading online is saying that damages and profits from the infringement are taken into account when a penalty for the infringement is assigned.

http://www2.lib.purdue.edu/uco/Copyr...penalties.html

The damage was the destruction of the JavaME business for Oracle/Sun. Folks that claim Android isn't Java is simply trying to delude you. It's Java...sure dalvik is different from j2me but no java dev is going to claim they aren't coding in Java when they code for Android.

That's the primary draw of the platform...it's java without the suckage of j2me. Android killed off linux phones and largely is now ripping the hell out of the base of j2me phones (symbian and blackberry).

Arguably, it is a state of affairs Sun never should have let happen but it's also not "do no evil".
post #180 of 278
Well, I see the Googleheads' and Fandroids' heads are exploding over this one. The very simple truth is that Google is a criminal enterprise with no respect for the law or intellectual property.
post #181 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Well, I see the Googleheads' and Fandroids' heads are exploding over this one. The very simple truth is that Google is a criminal enterprise with no respect for the law or intellectual property.

No, what this shows you is that once again AppleInsider is taking the clickbait path and posting a sensationalist (and false) story without updating it as new information comes to light. not that I blame them, they're making a ton of money.

And apple gets sued every other month for stealing IP (heck, the names iphone, ipad, etc were taken from other companies before they gave their consent). They get sued ALL THE TIME from companies claiming patent infringement. And it's not just from whack jobs either. They have a huge case pending against them from nokia over hardware patents.

The point is that patent law in the US is so ass-backwards that it's possible to sue anyone for anything. Google did not use this code in ANY distributions of android, it's nowhere in the shipped code and will NOT compile on your device if you make an AOSP build. A good majority of the code was uploaded from a wholly different company (not google) and THEY didn't even use it.

Yes, the re-licensing issue will be dealt with, but if you just read this article (or fosspatents) it would make it seem like Google stole this code and used it to make android what it is. They didn't. This code is NOT in android, it's in a defunct (and unused) tree of the open source project. Most of it was deleted from said project well before the article was even initially published.

Why does this matter? Oracle is trying to get PER DEVICE damages. Since this code is not on a SINGLE device, and google didn't use it to BUILD the code that was on those devices, the issue comes down to the licensing re-wrap (which was a bot, still wrong, but it doesn't make them evil) and not the code itself.

Do a search sometime (on whatever engine you use) for the number of patent lawsuits brought against apple that they've lost. It's been more than a few. The problem is with software that our patent system is so screwed up that it's IMPOSSIBLE to make something without being sued for it. This isn't protecting IP, it's people trying to get rich. I used to give apple the benefit of a doubt with the crap thrown at them because it gets thrown at anyone who makes it big, but then they started using their own bullshit patents to sue others instead of marketing against them directly.
post #182 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

The damage was the destruction of the JavaME business for Oracle/Sun. Folks that claim Android isn't Java is simply trying to delude you. It's Java...sure dalvik is different from j2me but no java dev is going to claim they aren't coding in Java when they code for Android.

That's the primary draw of the platform...it's java without the suckage of j2me. Android killed off linux phones and largely is now ripping the hell out of the base of j2me phones (symbian and blackberry).

Arguably, it is a state of affairs Sun never should have let happen but it's also not "do no evil".

Actually yes, it is Java. But here's the kicker. You can compile Java without paying Oracle (legally), you can program for it, and even make a java decoder without breaking any patents. The difference is on the mobile front. The compiler was patented. Java code itself isn't the issue. What oracle's trying to do is say that Google is using the mobile compiler, which is ironic because Oracle was one of the biggest voices pushing for Sun to opensource the rest of Java (a good chunk of it already is), up until they bought it.

What killed linux phones is linux. I like linux, and even I don't want a linuxOS phone. And blackberry and symbian are falling behind because they haven't changed with the market. They're still largely corporate based OS systems in a world where smartphones are about CONSUMERS not the corporate world. iOS (and to a lesser extent android) are consumer OS platforms that can operate within a corporate world. Blackberry is dying because of that reason, not because of the coding language.
post #183 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

And apple gets sued every other month for stealing IP (heck, the names iphone, ipad, etc were taken from other companies before they gave their consent). They get sued ALL THE TIME from companies claiming patent infringement. And it's not just from whack jobs either. They have a huge case pending against them from nokia over hardware patents.

First, you make it sound as if Apple, alone, is transgressing patents....


Quote:
Do a search sometime (on whatever engine you use) for the number of patent lawsuits brought against apple that they've lost. It's been more than a few. The problem is with software that our patent system is so screwed up that it's IMPOSSIBLE to make something without being sued for it. This isn't protecting IP, it's people trying to get rich. I used to give apple the benefit of a doubt with the crap thrown at them because it gets thrown at anyone who makes it big, but then they started using their own bullshit patents to sue others instead of marketing against them directly.

then you fail to acknowledge that they are using their patents defensively.

A more honest representation would have said that Nokia sued Apple over 24 patent violations and Apple responded by countersuing Nokia over 13 patent violations.
post #184 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

Actually yes, it is Java. But here's the kicker. You can compile Java without paying Oracle (legally), you can program for it, and even make a java decoder without breaking any patents. The difference is on the mobile front. The compiler was patented. Java code itself isn't the issue. What oracle's trying to do is say that Google is using the mobile compiler, which is ironic because Oracle was one of the biggest voices pushing for Sun to opensource the rest of Java (a good chunk of it already is), up until they bought it.

Android implemented parts of the Java SE class library...using code taken from Harmony. It's pretty danged hard to write Java without that stuff. And I guess that's where the patents in question are. MS and Sun had their kerfulluffle and MS developed a Java like language but their own class library in .net for C#. Google took a short cut. A HUGE short cut.

What Sun patents you actually get by passing the TCK is an interesting question. What is certain you only get grants if you pass the certification which Google never tried and Harmony never did. The GPL'd patent grants are only available if you use the GPL'd code. Which Google doesn't.

On the topic of Dalvik itself...there's a raftload of VM patents that Sun and MS cross-licensed during the j++ debacle. No java patent grants and Google might need to cross license these from Oracle...and maybe MS.

Oddly, Google probably would have been better off going with C# over Java...except for the mass stoning from the FOSS brigades for using any MS tech ever. I'd certainly rather face Ballmer than Ellison but I guess they figured Sun for a wimp...which was true at the time.

What escapes me is why the hell didn't they just BUY Sun.

Quote:
What killed linux phones is linux. I like linux, and even I don't want a linuxOS phone. And blackberry and symbian are falling behind because they haven't changed with the market. They're still largely corporate based OS systems in a world where smartphones are about CONSUMERS not the corporate world. iOS (and to a lesser extent android) are consumer OS platforms that can operate within a corporate world. Blackberry is dying because of that reason, not because of the coding language.

Given that Android's kernel is linux you could call it Android/Linux if Google behaved like the FSF or actually wanted folks to care the kernel is linux. That would be no on both counts but the fact is Google killed the various linux based smartphones by providing both a UI and SDK that didn't suck. Oracle is claiming that the non-suckage of the SDK is because they stole Java IP by not paying for a Java-ME license and trying to do an end run by using the Harmony code.

Blackberry is on the ropes because they pulled a Palm and got too complacent. Dying is overstated but they sure do have their work cut out for them.
post #185 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by veblen View Post

No worries on missing the distribute part.

In reference to B) I believe one of the arguments Google was making was that some of the files were only used on internal test devices and were not distributed to external parties.

You mentioned that even if the only people who Google distributed the code to were bloggers who just analyzed it for copyright issues that Google was guilty. I agree, but in this scenario what financial damage did this do to Oracle and what did Google gain from the infringement? This just looks like a little nit picky error that lawyers are going to make a big deal about. Little mistakes like this happen all the time. To me this just makes Oracle look like a patent troll.

Do you really believe Google doesn't profit from Android and gives it away free because that is what the good companies do? Oracle potentially lost licensing fees from every Android manufacturer.

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

Reply

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

Reply
post #186 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Realistic View Post

Do you really believe Google doesn't profit from Android and gives it away free because that is what the good companies do? Oracle potentially lost licensing fees from every Android manufacturer.

I never said google doesn't profit from android. I have said google didn't profit much if at all from the code described in the article. I really like your signature, Douglas Adams was great.
post #187 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by MicroNix View Post

Just had to comment on the end of the article regarding the iPhone clone garbage. Take a good look at the Google phones and you'll see they don't *look* anything like the iPhone. The iPhone is just a application launcher on its primary screens; boring and bland. Google Android makes the iPhone look like the iPhone is to the Palm Treo; yesterday's technology. There's no comparison!

And to the article itself, a developer that already pulled all this apart finds virtually none of the accused code is actually found in the end shipping product. Sorry for the waste of bytes on this article...

IMO and many others the iPhone makes Android look like a rough draft of a mobile OS and please let us know the name of this savant developer. Hopefully we can get that developer to contact Oracle and show them how pointless their lawsuit is.

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

Reply

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

Reply
post #188 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by irnchriz View Post

Well, those who can, do. Those who can't?!?! well they obviously fucking steal it then 'give it away'. Google are out to sell your shit and really shouldn't be trusted. Whether its scanning your emails, recording your browsing habits, capturing your access point details or just simple IP theft they really can't be trusted.


ABSOLUTELY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


People Completely MisUnderStand that Google is Champion of Open Source Architecture!

The truth is Android is "Openly Stolen Intellectual Property".

- Stolen Multi-touch interface from Apple.

- Stolen App store from Apple.

- Stolen intellectual properties from WinMo.

- Stolen JAVA from SUN/Oracle.

- Stolen Location Service from Skyhook.

- Stolen Logo/Icon name from Atari.

And What The Most Significant " FAKE " is :

- Wide OPEN to Carriers and Manufacturers BUT Desperately CLOSED TO END-USERS, Unless Rooted!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You TELL us ALL The READERS about THAT Android Phones' " INFAMOUS BLOATWARE " for Our Reference????????

What Real Open Source means:

"Open source is a development method for software that harnesses the power of distributed peer review and transparency of process. The promise of open source is better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility, lower cost, and an end to predatory vendor lock-in."

Android is not Open Source because Google develop it behind closed doors and don't contribute back to the upstream Linux kernel. They "use" Open Source but they don't contribute to it which makes them leeches.


Android apps and games run inside their Java VM only and don't benefit the broader GNU/Linux ecosystem.


Google doesn't care about real Open Source licences. All they care about is harvesting as
much information from fAndroids so as to sell them more advertising. It's ultimately about how much money they can squeeze out of users.


WE ( At Least REAL TECHIES unlike YOU ) ALL KNOW Android's Open Source is just a " MARKETING LABEL "!!!!!!!!!!!!.


In A NutShell, Android Open System is Counterfeited!!!!!!!!!!!!!


And Google is NOW Trying to Do The Same Thing AGAIN With Their WebM!!!!!!


Google is NOW an out of control mess. What their business reason for acquiring Sketchup, Picasa, YouTube, etc. is has not been explained nor does it make sense. This whole business of having a Chrome OS then not having a Chrome OS and taking Android from phones and scaling it up to tablets shows that the organization suffers from lack of vision and confusion.


Why I can See The DEMISE of Google's ONE of The Biggest REASON is Google searches are getting more and more irrelevant. Sure, they currently have a stranglehold on mindshare, but the quality of search results has plummeted so much over the years that there is a big opportunity for a competitor to eat their lunch. Some deep-pocketed folks have learned to game the super-secret PageRank scheme, so our access to good information is getting choked off unless we plow through the barely relevant hits leading to major corporations to get to the good stuff.

Google is poised to be where Microsoft was around 2000.
post #189 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by HIMOKO View Post

I'm ALREADY AT HOME, Idiot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WhatEver MUCH Ya Defend Google, In Vain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You Can NOT Avoid Google's " Demise " which HAS ALREADY BEGUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This forum is becoming a circus, from publishing debunked propaganda about the competition to comments full of aggressive nutjobs... Pathetic.
post #190 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOFEER View Post

how long before they all pull back from android

That is scheduled to happen. Right after they all pull back from windows...
post #191 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by penchanted View Post

T
What would make a difference in all civil cases is if there were "loser pays" rules; this would discourage frivolous lawsuits.

Frivolous lawsuits are usually dismissed early in the proceedings.

Your solution would certainly add additional discouragement to frivolous suits. However, it would also discourage novel suits by all but the wealthy. This is America, and we like justice better than that.

New and novel causes of action are good for all of us. For example, many product liability lawsuits used to get thrown out as frivolous, but the law has since expanded to give us additional protections against defective and dangerous products.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Instead, try to get the existing protections enforced more often, like sanctions which can be imposed on those who bring forth frivolous cases.
post #192 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

Who is "they"? You don't know who exactly checked it in. And since the only reason this was discovered is by their GIT change logs and they removed all the code before the article was even published, now what? They have no case.

It sounds like you also are claiming Dalvik is just Java decompiled and redone. There isn't any evidence of this yet.

Oracle isn't going to be dumb enough to waste their time with this. There isn't any "willful" infringement when the company found out about the code and said "Removed pointless test files."

A very elemental *Google* search would resolve your confusion about "willful" infringement. But since you clearly can't be bothered, let me share some verifiable information:

1. Copyright at its core doesn't require willful infringement - it operates on strict liability. Either you did a proscribed act (in this case, at least two proscribed acts - reproducing and distributing code) or you didn't. If you did, you're liable for statutory damages at the very least, unless a "fair use" exception excuses your violation (needless to say, no court would find that fair use applied in this case).
2. In addition to the strict liability, you get hit with even higher penalties if the plaintiff can demonstrate that you "willfully" infringed on her copyright (e.g. MP3.com putting all those songs on their server "because their users had already purchased the songs" or Google scanning all those books and putting them on the web because...well they're Google and I suppose information wants to be free...to sell ads).
3. To get statutory damages, a plaintiff does not need to show that you made a dime from violating her copyright. Just that you violated at least one of her exclusive rights. If she can prove that you did in fact make profit (and if the free of charge distributed Android violates the code, again no court would find that Google did not profit from it), then she can get significantly more damages.

You may spin the facts (which remain somewhat unclear) as you see fit but you, like Velben, also seem keen on recasting intellectual property LAW to mesh with your view of the world. Doesn't work that way.

Needless to say, there is no "my bad" exception to copyright law, where by you "remove" the "pointless" copyrighted work after having violated the owner's rights and magically escape liability.
post #193 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeCallMe...Tim View Post

Google is NOT AI's enemy. Google is AI's customer. Google gives money to AI. In exchange, AI sells us readers to Google. AI gets Google Money every time we click. More and more. I think that is a good thing.

If not for Google, sites like AI would dry up and blow away. AI owes perhaps its very existence to Google.

AI takes the Google Money, and gives part of it to Daniel. I am not surprised that Daniel talks big. The fact is, however, that he eats using Google's Money.

Actually, if you followed your own statement logically - AI and Google owe their very existence to we readers. But I can understand that fact could be difficult for you to comprehend.
post #194 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by White Rabbit View Post

Lets start by killing it very easily, don't use Google search, try any others, ...
If we all do this, Google will go under very quickly, so if you hate Google or don't trust them, then do something about it.
I have been nuts in the past using them, I will do my best to not use them again.

I hope you realize that by posting what you did, you made profits for Google. AI is a Google-sponsored site. Google is a very good customer of AI, and AI sold your stuff when you posted, because you are the product that AI sells to Google.

Google then takes you and resells you to various other companies.

So if you don't want to be AI's product, bought and sold by Google, then stay the hell away from AI. Every moment you spend here makes Google stronger and richer.

Others of us realize that without Google, there would be no AI. Some of us make it a point to click on Google ads on AI so that AI can get more and more Google Money. My suggestion to you is to click on AI's Google Ads, so that AI can get more Google Money and stay in business.
post #195 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

Actually yes, it is Java. But here's the kicker. You can compile Java without paying Oracle (legally), you can program for it, and even make a java decoder without breaking any patents. The difference is on the mobile front. The compiler was patented. Java code itself isn't the issue. What oracle's trying to do is say that Google is using the mobile compiler, which is ironic because Oracle was one of the biggest voices pushing for Sun to opensource the rest of Java (a good chunk of it already is), up until they bought it.

I think you'll find that Java FULL STOP is patented to hell. But as long as you abide by the terms of the license then you are granted a free license to those patents.

However, Google have re-distributed Java "PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL" source code (irrelevant what parts it's from) and changed the license. This is against the terms of said license. And in these cases the patents become enforceable.

THAT'S where Google are going to get their asses kicked, BOTH patent AND copyright infringement.
post #196 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

Sure it does. Damages are based on whether or not it was intentional. You familiar with the Microsoft case with MP3 patents?

I can host music on my computer all I want; until someone downloads it from me no infringement took place. If their server logs show only internal people got it or even like 10 people so what? An RIAA suit can make a person's life miserable; Google isn't exactly poor, and Oracle isn't going to get anything significant without any of the code being distributed on any android device.


You are inaccurate when you say "Damages are based on whether or not it was intentional" and dead wrong when you say "I can host music on my computer all I want; until someone downloads it from me no infringement took place."

Copyright operates on STRICT liability. You will incur statutory damages for a copyright violation regardless of your intent (if you're thinking of the "innocent infringer" defense, the judge only reduces damages, and anyway it pretty much would never apply to a sophisticated defender like Google.)


Once you make a copy of copyrighted music without authorization, you could be liable for violating the reproduction right. Now on a practical level, if you just copied it to a hard drive that you unplug and put on a shelf for the next 20 years, nobody's going to be able to sue you.

If you put the same music files on a publicly accessible server, you could additionally be liable for violating the right to distribute, whether or not a single copy was ever downloaded.

Your statement is like saying if you made 1000 copies of the Lion King and put it on a shelf in your store, you wouldn't be liable for infringement unless someone actually bought one of your bootlegs. Now even if the copies were in your home, if there were a reason to raid your home (say if a search warrant were issued because you are a notorious bootlegger), you'd still be liable for violating the reproduction right. Now, no judge is likely to issue a search warrant for a fishing expedition into people's homes unless there's a very good reason to think they're engaged in serious violations.

A more accurate statement would be "I can host music on my computer all I want; until someone downloads it from me, no one's likely to sue me for the infringement I've already committed."

Google cannot escape liability simply because only one person or 100 people downloaded an otherwise protected work. The number of people who downloaded it is completely irrelevant to base level liability, as is whether those people were internal or external to Google.
post #197 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by White Rabbit View Post

The classic response from a troll.
Blame others for doing the same, just to try and hide Google's blatant steal.
I love you guys lol ! You are so funny.

You don't understand what a "troll" is.

I can tell you a "troll" isn't just someone that you disagree with!
post #198 of 278
Partial Quote ..

Quote:
Originally Posted by HIMOKO View Post


Why I can See The DEMISE of Google's ONE of The Biggest REASON is Google searches are getting more and more irrelevant. Sure, they currently have a stranglehold on mindshare, but the quality of search results has plummeted so much over the years that there is a big opportunity for a competitor to eat their lunch. Some deep-pocketed folks have learned to game the super-secret PageRank scheme, so our access to good information is getting choked off unless we plow through the barely relevant hits leading to major corporations to get to the good stuff.

Google is poised to be where Microsoft was around 2000.

Not that I understand wtf has happened to it but I have to agree Google is becoming very frustrating when it comes to looking things up.

Examples: When I look up a Mac application I've heard of and want to know more the first page of results are where and how to steal it, stream a copy, get the passwords or share a copy … not the web site of the creator!

Technical scientific info: It's just as likely to read screeds of totally false crap. To be honest I now go directly to wikipedia to look up most things up. Although I fear for that next with the move to allow easier editing!

Dates: I am sick of data from years ago being at the top .. is an automatic built in date relevance so hard?

Huge volume of completely untrue rubbish also being listed high up. Snopes has also become one of my hot buttons these days.

I refuse to use Bing so personally I am hoping for a really well done Google alternative!
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #199 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

... Yes, the re-licensing issue will be dealt with, but if you just read this article (or fosspatents) it would make it seem like Google stole this code and used it to make android what it is. They didn't. This code is NOT in android, it's in a defunct (and unused) tree of the open source project. Most of it was deleted from said project well before the article was even initially published. ...

So, what you're saying is that if you wash away the blood before the crime is reported, you aren't guilty? No, the fact remains that Google is a criminal enterprise, with a long history of criminal behavior, especially where copyrights are concerned. Their behavior is so flagrantly in violation of the law, and so widespread throughout the organization, that I think the DOJ should open a RICO investigation.
post #200 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

So, what you're saying is that if you wash away the blood before the crime is reported, you aren't guilty? No, the fact remains that Google is a criminal enterprise, with a long history of criminal behavior, especially where copyrights are concerned. Their behavior is so flagrantly in violation of the law, and so widespread throughout the organization, that I think the DOJ should open a RICO investigation.

Sun's IP couldn't be in better hands than Larry's this all being the case. I don't see him turning a blind eye in fact I wonder if this was behind the purchase in the first place. Maybe he and SJ planned all this and the timing ...The old 'give them enough rope ploy' ...

BTW: When did this all start, I assume the original Google was straightforward enough.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google found distributing Oracle's Java code within Android project