I'll bite. So few lines shows that Google was policing the inclusion of stolen code quite aggressively. With the number of developers involved, and the ease of finding code on the internet, providing any of those developers a bit of time saving, finding just a few dozen lines of borrowed code out of several million is a pretty major triumph for the Google's policies and procedures.
As to whether use of copyrighted APIs is considered fair use, that's a separate issue. I would argue that in this case it probably is fair use, though I could be convinced otherwise by an argument that wasn't as full of invectives as most of what I see in this comments list. Sun probably wouldn't have bothered suing over it, since they were a very open source friendly company, and probably didn't excessively mind a from-scratch Java fork as long as they didn't use the name. Oracle? Not so much. Oracle's history with open source has proven quite hostile, which is forcing a lot of development companies to search for alternatives to a lot of the great stuff that Sun had built up over its history.
Sun released Java under the GNU GPL
Google broke interoperability and changed the Dalvik license to Apache, specifically so they could keep parts of Android closed.
Would it not be better to have Android fully and truly open?
Breaking interoperability also broke the window that "fair use" has been thrown out of.
So true.
It's never/always too early. If one waited too long it wouldn't really be Schadenfreude. And for the object of the Schadenfreude, it's always too early.
Google broke interoperability and changed the Dalvik license to Apache, specifically so they could keep parts of Android closed.
Would it not be better to have Android fully and truly open?
Breaking interoperability also broke the window that "fair use" has been thrown out of.
Perhaps. Sun went hot and cold on its aggressiveness about Java, and its implementation for cell phones was actually bad enough that for the language to have value in some android-like environment, Google would have needed to make it incompatible. Given that Sun didn't care enough to really stop Google, it was a not unreasonable opening that would have gone just fine had Larry not bought it.
As I said, Oracle has been making plenty of people rethink their use or abuse of many of Sun's technologies. Android is in a uniquely poor position to adjust if Oracle wins in its attempts at being nasty about all this. Users of mysql who have been pressured by Oracle to pay a lot more for commercial licenses can at least spend some effort and switch to postgres. Most users of Java can spend time switching away from it as they do new development. Google's environment depends on its unsanctioned (but essentially Sun accepted) quirks for compatibility with the larger ecosystem they created. That will be very difficult to unwind.
Also, I really don't know why the rest of us personalize any of this as much as some do. This is the big boys fighting each other with big guns, as they will do. I have no idea why it really matters to anyone who isn't a major investor in any one of them. And, if you don't want to use Android because it is too complicated and geeky (I don't use it for that reason) then, don't use it. Apple will be fine either way.
Perhaps. Sun went hot and cold on its aggressiveness about Java, and its implementation for cell phones was actually bad enough that for the language to have value in some android-like environment, Google would have needed to make it incompatible. Given that Sun didn't care enough to really stop Google, it was a not unreasonable opening that would have gone just fine had Larry not bought it.
As I said, Oracle has been making plenty of people rethink their use or abuse of many of Sun's technologies. Android is in a uniquely poor position to adjust if Oracle wins in its attempts at being nasty about all this. Users of mysql who have been pressured by Oracle to pay a lot more for commercial licenses can at least spend some effort and switch to postgres. Most users of Java can spend time switching away from it as they do new development. Google's environment depends on its unsanctioned (but essentially Sun accepted) quirks for compatibility with the larger ecosystem they created. That will be very difficult to unwind.
Also, I really don't know why the rest of us personalize any of this as much as some do. This is the big boys fighting each other with big guns, as they will do. I have no idea why it really matters to anyone who isn't a major investor in any one of them. And, if you don't want to use Android because it is too complicated and geeky (I don't use it for that reason) then, don't use it. Apple will be fine either way.
It's about Google being a bunch of lying, cheating thieves while representing themselves as something else.
Above all else it's this hypocrisy which is the worst.
Never been a fan of Oracle or Ellison .... but at this point, I am all on their side!
On the same note, Google has messed around with a wrong guy and company. Nobody and I mean NOBODY does that!
Ellison wants his $$ back and NOW!
Oracle has totally screwed the state of Oregon by charging millions of dollars for software systems and then totally botching them, so they don't even work. The worst was Oregon's health care website (called Cover Oregon), which never worked and is now worthless. The state will now have to join the federal exchange, and shut down Cover Oregon. Of course, the state itself screwed up, since it didn't have a system in place to monitor Oracle and find problems early.
Ellison can go to hell. I'm glad the court decision went against Google (it's the right decision), but Ellison can go jump off a bridge. Two criminal companies.
Will Google now pay for use of this code in future products or will they abandon it and reconfigure Android? If they must pay a fee for every Android device in the future and they already aren't earning money from that hardware, would it even be economical to continue the Android project at all? Perhaps Samsung and others that manufacture the phones and tablets would be the ones to kick in the license fees for future usage.
Could Google fork the Chrome OS to make it work on phones and tablets as well as other computers? The head designer for the Chrome OS project has stated several times that they don't have any intention of integrating Android and Chrome OS. Maybe that is now about to change.
Will Google now pay for use of this code in future products or will they abandon it and reconfigure Android? If they must pay a fee for every Android device in the future and they already aren't earning money from that hardware, would it even be economical to continue the Android project at all? Perhaps Samsung and others that manufacture the phones and tablets would be the ones to kick in the license fees for future usage.
Could Google fork the Chrome OS to make it work on phones and tablets as well as other computers? The head designer for the Chrome OS project has stated several times that they don't have any intention of integrating Android and Chrome OS. Maybe that is now about to change.
It's nowhere near that point yet. There's some misreading of the Appeals Court decision as Google now having to remove any offending Java code, arrange a license with Oracle or abandon Android altogether. Some, all or none of that may happen eventually. It hasn't even been determined yet that Oracle's API's were protected from being used by Google without Oracle's express OK. If that ends up in Oracle's favor then it comes down to the "cure". This is neither pro nor anti-Google. It's just the way things currently stand.
Just as I said on page one of the comments, if Google is found to have damaged Oracle by their use of Java API's then Google will be responsible for making them whole. Just as it should be under the law. But there's still a fair distance in both rulings and time between then and now. Everything will eventually be settled either by choice or court-order.
Your honor must of those 7000 lines of code has been replaced, it was fair use. Even if it's not, how much is it worth when million lines of code are used in android.
Jury:fair use
Jury:not fair use, but not worth much.
Outcome: Google gets away. Google gives oracle a few pennies.
Oracle says Google has to come up with a unique API. Ever Android program has to be redesigned using an unfamiliar design language. Android market share plummets.
You don't really believe the nonsense you write. The negative implications of this judgement are huge and will destroy much of the software industry. Let me give you a simple example: Take a copyrighted API to a library. This would prevent a functionally compatible library with, for example security or performance advantages from being made available for about 70 years.
This simply overturns the travesty of the District Courts ruling that attempted to overturn 20-30 of established law that APIs are can hold copyright and be infringed. It is funny to read the hacking code monkeys that only copy the designs of others.
In short, this ruling keeps the established law unchanged.
Oracle says Google has to come up with a unique API. Ever Android program has to be redesigned using an unfamiliar design language. Android market share plummets.
If it gets to damages there'll be 2 parts—past damages will be in dollars, and there'll be some remedy to deal with going forward. I'm doubtful Oracle will ever grant a Java license to Google that doesn't require write once, run anywhere compatibility, no matter how much Google was willing to pay. Injunctions are a very common, if not the most common remedy for stopping ongoing copyright infringement. I'm not aware of any case law denying an injunction for ongoing copyright infringement. So an injunction seems the likeliest outcome should Google lose on Fair Use now that they're liable for infringement. If they lose on Fair Use which seems likely, Google might be able to get a stay until all appeals are exhausted. But I've not yet heard a single argument why the Supremes would bother hearing this case, it's totally in keeping with all their copyright precedents, and they do only hear 1 for every 10,000 cases they get petitions for.
Conceivably, Oracle could come up with some kind of license to give Google enough time to become Java Compliant (3 years). I doubt they'd hold off an injunction while Google switched to some other API framework which woul likely take longer. But who knows, certainly Google has to have been considering its options since the suit began and must have some kind of contingency plans figured out by now.
Quote:
In short, this ruling keeps the established law unchanged.
Exactly so. Declaring code is still code that's given the same protection as my novel would get. There's never been any case law that says API declaring code is uncopyrightable. But interestingly, the 3 judges here seem to be saying that the 3 core Java API's (out of the 37 accused)—the 3 you need just to write in Java—might not be copyrightable, and that they are the ones required for interoperability. By the same token, they also point out that interoperability is only relevant to when the author first created the work, and not when an infringer copies it, as Google claimed and got away with in the District Court.
I'd love to see Android be made illegal (after Google has been found guilty of stealing the OS), and nobody would be allowed to sell any more Android phones that contains infringing code, which basically means that every Android phone ever made should be forbidden.
They would have to rewrite their entire OS from scratch and start from the beginning again.
Either that, or they should get hit with such big fines, that it would make their whole business unprofitable. The judgements in these cases are far too low. Crime really does pay it seems.
And everyone guilty of using an Android device should be executed?
If the punishment decision on the Oracle case goes particularly bad for Google, what are the chances Samsung will tire enough of the Android legal hassles to go all-in with Tizen now that they've cracked the door open? If they do, will Android be able to maintain enough of a market share for Google to be willing to let it continue burning up money?
For that matter, has Tizen been constructed carefully enough to avoid all the legal hassles from Orcale, Apple, & Microsoft? (Presumably given their litigation lighting rod status on Android, Samsung would have been highly motivated to make avoiding legal trouble a prime focus of any alternate OS development?)
Comments
And no one on here says your patent system is bust?
Yeah, he does do that.
Sun released Java under the GNU GPL
Google broke interoperability and changed the Dalvik license to Apache, specifically so they could keep parts of Android closed.
Would it not be better to have Android fully and truly open?
Breaking interoperability also broke the window that "fair use" has been thrown out of.
It's never/always too early. If one waited too long it wouldn't really be Schadenfreude. And for the object of the Schadenfreude, it's always too early.
Sun released Java under the GNU GPL
Google broke interoperability and changed the Dalvik license to Apache, specifically so they could keep parts of Android closed.
Would it not be better to have Android fully and truly open?
Breaking interoperability also broke the window that "fair use" has been thrown out of.
Perhaps. Sun went hot and cold on its aggressiveness about Java, and its implementation for cell phones was actually bad enough that for the language to have value in some android-like environment, Google would have needed to make it incompatible. Given that Sun didn't care enough to really stop Google, it was a not unreasonable opening that would have gone just fine had Larry not bought it.
As I said, Oracle has been making plenty of people rethink their use or abuse of many of Sun's technologies. Android is in a uniquely poor position to adjust if Oracle wins in its attempts at being nasty about all this. Users of mysql who have been pressured by Oracle to pay a lot more for commercial licenses can at least spend some effort and switch to postgres. Most users of Java can spend time switching away from it as they do new development. Google's environment depends on its unsanctioned (but essentially Sun accepted) quirks for compatibility with the larger ecosystem they created. That will be very difficult to unwind.
Also, I really don't know why the rest of us personalize any of this as much as some do. This is the big boys fighting each other with big guns, as they will do. I have no idea why it really matters to anyone who isn't a major investor in any one of them. And, if you don't want to use Android because it is too complicated and geeky (I don't use it for that reason) then, don't use it. Apple will be fine either way.
It's about Google being a bunch of lying, cheating thieves while representing themselves as something else.
Above all else it's this hypocrisy which is the worst.
Never been a fan of Oracle or Ellison .... but at this point, I am all on their side!
On the same note, Google has messed around with a wrong guy and company. Nobody and I mean NOBODY does that!
Ellison wants his $$ back and NOW!
Oracle has totally screwed the state of Oregon by charging millions of dollars for software systems and then totally botching them, so they don't even work. The worst was Oregon's health care website (called Cover Oregon), which never worked and is now worthless. The state will now have to join the federal exchange, and shut down Cover Oregon. Of course, the state itself screwed up, since it didn't have a system in place to monitor Oracle and find problems early.
Ellison can go to hell. I'm glad the court decision went against Google (it's the right decision), but Ellison can go jump off a bridge. Two criminal companies.
Will Google now pay for use of this code in future products or will they abandon it and reconfigure Android? If they must pay a fee for every Android device in the future and they already aren't earning money from that hardware, would it even be economical to continue the Android project at all? Perhaps Samsung and others that manufacture the phones and tablets would be the ones to kick in the license fees for future usage.
Could Google fork the Chrome OS to make it work on phones and tablets as well as other computers? The head designer for the Chrome OS project has stated several times that they don't have any intention of integrating Android and Chrome OS. Maybe that is now about to change.
A bit OT
but what about the first BIG lie,
the source of Sun's downfall
"Oh this peecee
is just like a Sun Unix/Solaris workstation
only cheaper"
; )
It's nowhere near that point yet. There's some misreading of the Appeals Court decision as Google now having to remove any offending Java code, arrange a license with Oracle or abandon Android altogether. Some, all or none of that may happen eventually. It hasn't even been determined yet that Oracle's API's were protected from being used by Google without Oracle's express OK. If that ends up in Oracle's favor then it comes down to the "cure". This is neither pro nor anti-Google. It's just the way things currently stand.
Just as I said on page one of the comments, if Google is found to have damaged Oracle by their use of Java API's then Google will be responsible for making them whole. Just as it should be under the law. But there's still a fair distance in both rulings and time between then and now. Everything will eventually be settled either by choice or court-order.
Oracle says Google has to come up with a unique API. Ever Android program has to be redesigned using an unfamiliar design language. Android market share plummets.
This simply overturns the travesty of the District Courts ruling that attempted to overturn 20-30 of established law that APIs are can hold copyright and be infringed. It is funny to read the hacking code monkeys that only copy the designs of others.
In short, this ruling keeps the established law unchanged.
Oracle says Google has to come up with a unique API. Ever Android program has to be redesigned using an unfamiliar design language. Android market share plummets.
If it gets to damages there'll be 2 parts—past damages will be in dollars, and there'll be some remedy to deal with going forward. I'm doubtful Oracle will ever grant a Java license to Google that doesn't require write once, run anywhere compatibility, no matter how much Google was willing to pay. Injunctions are a very common, if not the most common remedy for stopping ongoing copyright infringement. I'm not aware of any case law denying an injunction for ongoing copyright infringement. So an injunction seems the likeliest outcome should Google lose on Fair Use now that they're liable for infringement. If they lose on Fair Use which seems likely, Google might be able to get a stay until all appeals are exhausted. But I've not yet heard a single argument why the Supremes would bother hearing this case, it's totally in keeping with all their copyright precedents, and they do only hear 1 for every 10,000 cases they get petitions for.
Conceivably, Oracle could come up with some kind of license to give Google enough time to become Java Compliant (3 years). I doubt they'd hold off an injunction while Google switched to some other API framework which woul likely take longer. But who knows, certainly Google has to have been considering its options since the suit began and must have some kind of contingency plans figured out by now.
Exactly so. Declaring code is still code that's given the same protection as my novel would get. There's never been any case law that says API declaring code is uncopyrightable. But interestingly, the 3 judges here seem to be saying that the 3 core Java API's (out of the 37 accused)—the 3 you need just to write in Java—might not be copyrightable, and that they are the ones required for interoperability. By the same token, they also point out that interoperability is only relevant to when the author first created the work, and not when an infringer copies it, as Google claimed and got away with in the District Court.
And generally not a bad antagonist. He is honest in his views and consistent with his criticism. This is a better board with his additions.
This is a response to the quote describing Gatorguy as a better user of grammar then another newer commenter.
I'd love to see Android be made illegal (after Google has been found guilty of stealing the OS), and nobody would be allowed to sell any more Android phones that contains infringing code, which basically means that every Android phone ever made should be forbidden.
They would have to rewrite their entire OS from scratch and start from the beginning again.
Either that, or they should get hit with such big fines, that it would make their whole business unprofitable. The judgements in these cases are far too low. Crime really does pay it seems.
And everyone guilty of using an Android device should be executed?
No, just given treatment for the trauma they have suffered that turned them into rabid Internet trolls.
No, just given treatment for the trauma they have suffered that turned them into rabid Internet trolls.
Are you trying to imply that I'm an Android user?
Interesting timing - coincides with news that sounds like Samsung may finally be serious about selling Tizen phones:
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303851804579555492042313988?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303851804579555492042313988.html
If the punishment decision on the Oracle case goes particularly bad for Google, what are the chances Samsung will tire enough of the Android legal hassles to go all-in with Tizen now that they've cracked the door open? If they do, will Android be able to maintain enough of a market share for Google to be willing to let it continue burning up money?
For that matter, has Tizen been constructed carefully enough to avoid all the legal hassles from Orcale, Apple, & Microsoft? (Presumably given their litigation lighting rod status on Android, Samsung would have been highly motivated to make avoiding legal trouble a prime focus of any alternate OS development?)