Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf]

Re:Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf] by mrkstu on Monday April 05, 2021 @10:16AM (#26699231)

Yep. This case was an existential threat to multitudes of industries and the assumptions they were built on.

The weird thing is it would of hurt Oracle as much as anyone. I have no clue how anyone w/any technical merit didn't understand that this was a footgun of the largest possible magnitude for them.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf] by thedevelopnik on Monday April 05, 2021 @10:38AM (#26699588)

I had the opportunity once to talk to an IP lawyer for Oracle and brought this up. I specifically brought up the S3 compatibility of their cloud storage among other instances.

His reply was “without admitting anything specific, how do you know we haven’t purchased private licenses for anything you just mentioned?”

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf] by throwaway3699 on Monday April 05, 2021 @10:49AM (#26699757)

It's still silly. Imagine if you needed to purchase a license for the shape of plug that fits inside a standard plug socket - to build any appliance.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf] by rodgerd on Monday April 05, 2021 @06:43PM (#26705597)

Plenty of good, cheap DACs built in China (e.g. Topping) have an HDMI-shaped plug (IIS) that supports PCM-over-not-HDMI which happens to be compatible with HDMI sources, but don't dare mention HDMI because they don't want to pull in an interlocking, price-gouging nonsense from the US entertainment industry.

So you don't quite need a license for the shape of the plug, but you do need to pretend it's not something that it is.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf] by thedevelopnik on Monday April 05, 2021 @11:37AM (#26700420)

Oh yeah he and I still fundamentally disagreed, but it gave me some insight into Oracle’s position.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf] by bobmalone123 on Monday April 05, 2021 @11:01AM (#26699933)

Imagine if you had to pay a software developer 300K a year to design that API that you think it’s cool to steal.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf] by throwaway3699 on Monday April 05, 2021 @02:03PM (#26702335)

Someone had to design plug sockets too.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf] by kaba0 on Monday April 05, 2021 @11:06AM (#26699990)

Isn’t S3 under the Apache license?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf] by gjsman-1000 on Monday April 05, 2021 @10:17AM (#26699258)

In my own mind, when CentOS died Oracle was saying you should move to "Oracle Unbreakable Linux"... which is a downstream clone of RHEL, just like CentOS was. Just one example of the hypocrisy.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf] by throwaway8581 on Monday April 05, 2021 @10:43AM (#26699664)

It is uncontested that Oracle cloning RHEL is allowed by the license that RHEL is released under. They don't need a fair use ruling from the Supreme Court because they literally have a license that allows exactly what they did. The same could not be said for Google's actions in this case.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf] by bryanlarsen on Monday April 05, 2021 @10:25AM (#26699389)

Even more egregiously, Oracle's whole existence is based off of copying the SQL API from IBM.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf] by coldpie on Monday April 05, 2021 @10:41AM (#26699638)

I'd really like it if we could kill Oracle somehow. They are easily the worst player in the technology industry.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf] by kaba0 on Monday April 05, 2021 @11:07AM (#26700001)

Based on what?

[ Parent | on HN ]