U.S. Supreme Court Denies Google's Request to Appeal Oracle API Case

Re:U.S. Supreme Court Denies Google's Request to Appeal Orac... by wtallis on Monday June 29, 2015 @11:30PM (#9802761)

> So are they claiming that it infringes copyright if your implementation is a superset or a subset of the original implementation, but if it is an exact implementation, then it's not copyright infringement?

They're claiming that any of the above would require an API license, and that a license (requiring GPL for the implementation) was granted only to the latter, so a subset would be unauthorized infringement.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. Supreme Court Denies Google's Request to Appeal Orac... by pyre on Tuesday June 30, 2015 @01:28PM (#9806946)

But when you start creating an implementation, it ends up being a subset while it is a work in progress. Are you stating that works in progress are infringing, until they become "magically" not infringing at the point where they reach parity?

Does Mono infringe on Microsoft's .NET API because it has always lagged behind the official .NET API, even though the goal of the project is to achieve compatibility?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. Supreme Court Denies Google's Request to Appeal Orac... by wtallis on Wednesday July 01, 2015 @11:22AM (#9812418)

.NET isn't relevant because Microsoft isn't trying to control it with the same kind of licensing terms that Oracle's using to try to ensure that anybody else's Java implementation adheres to their standards.

[ Parent | on HN ]