peterbob
About
- Username
- peterbob
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- -
- Roles
- member
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 60
Reactions
Comments
-
Much better idea then ibeacons in my opinion. Its web base not app base. I shouldn't have to download an app to get information. Google can't do what apple does due to hardware variation and fragmentation so they move up the stack to the cloud. Ap…
-
atlapple wrote: » Apple copied at least nine features Android has had for years with iOS 8. The one sided copy argument got old a long time ago. Not to mention the fact that Apple was never going to go above a 3.5 inch iPhone because that was the …
-
DED and "Gutter" journalism go hand and hand. See what I did there?
-
Android app as well.
-
Man DED I have to give it to you. How far did you have to reach for this article. You're soul, your heart, your bowels, a parallel universe? I can feel the desperation and vague connections. This is your masterpiece, well done my good man. There is …
-
Has Google sued bing, yahoo, or any other search engine? No. Why because pagerank is an actual software patent. There is nothing vague about pagerank. The math is laid out.
-
Man DED's hardon for Google and android bashing is reaching epic proportions. Respect
-
A lot of iPhone fanboy thumbs are going to get magically longer this fall. In all seriousness this looks awesome. I've been waiting for the iPhone to get bigger. Depending if apple fixes app linking in iOS 8 this might be might first iPhone since …
-
We will see where this will go, the specific appeal court us known to be very conservative and always decide in favor of protection. We have a few more years before this is settled. Its a wait and see. Meanwhile the two great mobile platforms will…
-
daveinpublic wrote: » Sun wanted to protect their business - Google wanted to protect their's. So Google doesn't have the moral high ground, they're both trying to do the same thing. The difference is, Google hadn't done any work to deserve a say …
-
Corrections wrote: » Google's "fair use" argument hinged upon the idea that it was fair for Google to use Java's API in order to maintain compatibility. But Google didn't maintain compatibility. It did to Java what Microsoft did to Java in the 199…
-
jungmark wrote: » If it's "only" 3%, why'd they steal it in the first place. They believe the APIs shouldn't be protected under copyright and if they are it should be fair use. Next trial will decide. It's a wait and see.
-
cpsro wrote: » ART eliminates the API with the Dalvik bytecode interpreter but doesn't change the Java language API. Yes, the reverse ruling is all about copyright. Fair use will next be determined with instructions from an appropriately infor…
-
ruddy wrote: » Not one of them has been replaced, and not one of them can be replaced without rewriting Android from scratch to replace those 37 Java API packages. Google can afford to pay the couple billion for past damages that Oracle want…
-
digitalclips wrote: » Your honor, it's coincidence those 7000 lines look the same, honestly! 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 u…
-
dickprinter wrote: » LOL. There's a reason why the original ruling has been reversed, Peterbob. He must be worried about losing his shill money…. This reverse rulling has everything to do with copyright of APIs not fair use. There will be…
-
ruddy wrote: » Actually it was more than 7000 lines of API declaring code that was copied verbatim. I'll wait for the trial. If its fair use. It's not stealing.
-
hill60 wrote: » At least 47 lines of code. If its fair use its not stealing.
-
jungmark wrote: » Except or accept? Google is a thief. F*ck all thieves. What did Google sleal.
-
SpamSandwich wrote: » This is going to really hurt Android and I'm lovin' it. Celebrating way too early are we. If this is fair use Google has nothing to worry about. Even if Google has to pay its only for 37 APIs most of which has been replace…