SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Oracle v. Google: Appeals Court Rules That Google Violated Oracle's Copyrights
A federal appeals court has ruled against Google in the Oracle v. Google legal war over the use of Java in Android. However, the case could move to the Supreme Court, a full panel of the appeals court judges, or to a third trial in district court:
An appeals court said on Tuesday that Google violated copyright laws when it used Oracle's open-source Java software to build the Android platform in 2009.
Tuesday's ruling is the latest development in a topsy-turvy eight-year battle between Google (GOOG) and Oracle (ORCL).
Oracle first brought its case against Google in 2010, claiming that Android infringes two patents that Oracle holds on its Java software, a ubiquitous programming language powering everything from phones to websites.
In 2012, a jury determined that Java does not deserve protection under copyright law. Two years later, an appeals court overturned the ruling, raising the question of whether Google's use of Oracle's API violated copyright law.
A jury determined in 2016 that Google's use of Oracle's APIs was legal under the copyright law's fair use doctrine, which allows the free use of copyrighted material under specific circumstances. Oracle appealed the decision, and a judge took its side on Tuesday.
Also at Bloomberg and The Verge.
Federal Circuit Sends Oracle v. Google Back for Third Trial
A while back Oracle sued Google various aspects of their clean-room Java reimplementation and Google initially won that back in 2012. However, appeals have dragged the case out. At issue now is whether APIs can be restricted under copyright.
The Federal Circuit has ruled for a second time in Oracle v. Google, the software copyright lawsuit over Google's Android platform. The new decision reverses the district court yet again and sends the case back for a third trial to determine damages for Oracle. In the last trial, Oracle sought almost $9 billion in damages.
The litigation has been dragging on for about eight years now, bouncing up and down through appeals and two whole jury trials. [...]
Obviously, whether APIs can soon be restricted by copyright would defeat the purpose of an API as well as have severe repercussions for all software development occuring in the US.
From The Verge : Federal Circuit sends Oracle v. Google back for third trial.
(Score: 2) by BananaPhone on Wednesday March 28 2018, @05:34PM (7 children)
Maybe they are suing for the original implementation of Android from when Sun owned Java. (!)
This is wrong, too.
Either way. APIs should not be copyright-able.
Only the implementation should.
(Score: 5, Informative) by DannyB on Wednesday March 28 2018, @05:47PM (2 children)
Google never used Sun's Java. Google used Apache Harmony which is open source (Apache 2 license), and mostly written by IBM. So the actual lack of any copyright infringement is how Oracle morphed their case to claim that somehow in some bizzarro world APIs are copyrightable.
Agree about implementation and interface of APIs. Any APIs.
Other thoughts on Java are hear [soylentnews.org] (under best programming font).
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by BananaPhone on Wednesday March 28 2018, @06:08PM (1 child)
So... Google got sued and LOST
for building the Android OS from an open source licensed Java implantation
by a company that didn't write that Java implantation?
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday March 28 2018, @07:16PM
As Bester said: Nailed it in one Mr. Garibaldi.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Thursday March 29 2018, @11:02AM (3 children)
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday March 29 2018, @01:34PM (2 children)
I would say this about proprietary APIs.
If you have a secret API that you don't want anyone to use, then keep it to yourself. Don't publish it.
Of course, others can reverse engineer it. And probably will if there is a reason. (eg: hidden APIs in Windows)
If you're going to allow people to create independent implementations of your copyrighted API, then what is the purpose of the copyright?
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Thursday March 29 2018, @02:17PM (1 child)
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday March 29 2018, @05:19PM
I absolutely don't have a problem with attribution and being sure that nobody else can falsely claim credit. But that doesn't seem to be the purpose of copyright.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.