Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Wouldn't he be a touch biased?
More than a touch, but he won't be the only one.
It depends on what's meant by saying he's biased. In the video he talks about how he sees Oracle technology being used for Android but they don't license anything:
He's doing alright there for 68. Billionaire, beautiful women (even if she's an ex now):
All from databases.
He sees Google as thieves. Even if they are Robin Hood-like thieves that take expensive tech and give it away (with the small difference from Robin Hood being that it's used to sell advertising and generate large profits), they are still seen as having taken other companies' IP.
"At the end of the trial, a jury handed down a partial verdict that found that Google infringed the overall structure, sequence, and organization of Java's language, but offered no opinion on the matter of fair use. A few days later, however, the judge presiding over the case, Judge William Alsup, ruled that the APIs were non-copyrightable, which led to the dismissal of Oracle's copyright infringement claim.
Unhappy with this outcome, Oracle filed an appeal to the judge's ruling in October. In its appeals brief, the company said Google's use of Java in Android was "decidedly unfair" and that copyright is designed to protect all kinds of works, including "a short poem or even a Chinese menu," but what it created in Java was "vastly more original, creative, and labor-intensive."
Regarding EFF's amicus brief, Oracle's Deborah Hellinger told CNET, "I guess everyone is having collective amnesia about the uncontroverted testimony that Android is not compatible with Java."
"The issue is Android, which is written in a programming language called Java. Oracle gained control of Java when it bought Sun Microsystems in 2010.
That means that most Android applications are written in a form of Java customized for Android.
Oracle sued Google in 2010 for copyright and patent infringment over its use of Java in Android, and last May a jury ruled in Google's favor. Developers worry they'll be hurt as the two tech giants squabble.
Page didn't have a great answer for that.
"We've had a difficult relationship with Oracle, including having to appear in court," he quipped. "We'd like to have a positive relationship with them but that doesn't seem possible. Money is more important to them than any kind of collaboration."
He only added vaguely, "I think we'll get through that. Android is very important to the Java ecosystem. We'll get through that just fine, just not in an ideal way."
Google has a habit of taking things that are difficult to protect under the law but clearly take a lot of work to implement. Apple will have gone through dozens of iterations of the iPhone over a number of years before the 2007 launch and to some people it's ok to come along, look at that and say 'oh cool, rectangle shape, bouncy scrolling, I'll take that' and trivialise the work that went into putting together the whole reference design. Google always uses statements like "money is more important to them than any kind of collaboration". Well, how about giving away the Google search engine or Adword designs to Microsoft, Apple or Oracle if money is less important than collaboration? They are happy to give away other people's work for free but not their own. I'm sure Oracle would happily give away Google's IP if it didn't affect their bottom line.