Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday March 13 2020, @04:18AM   Printer-friendly
from the SELECT-items-FROM-cookware-WHERE-color='black'; dept.

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

More than a decade ago, Google re-implemented the Java programming language as part of its new Android mobile operating system. Oracle, the owner of Java, then sued Google for copyright infringement in 2010. Later this month, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in this epic copyright case that will have huge implications for the entire software industry—and that could cost Google billions of dollars.

Google says it has done nothing wrong. Copyright law specifically excludes "systems" and "methods of operation" from copyright protection. Google argues that the aspects of Java it copied—function names, argument types, and so forth—fit squarely into these exceptions. Google also argues that copyright's fair use doctrine allows for this kind of copying.

The case is being closely watched by the software industry. Companies like Microsoft and IBM have warned that Oracle's stance could create chaos for the industry. They argue that making this kind of copying illegal would not only create legal headaches for a lot of software companies—it would be bad for customers, too.

Software companies copy software interfaces—known in industry jargon as application programming interfaces (APIs)—of their competitors' products all the time. This allows competing software products to be interoperable so that a customer can take software designed to work on one platform and re-use it on another. That means lower switching costs for customers. It also means lower barriers for entry for software startups, since it's easier to sell a new product if it's compatible with a software product that customers already know and trust.

If anyone should understand the importance of such copying, it's Oracle. After all, Oracle got its start in the 1970s selling a database product based on the then-new structured query language (SQL). SQL was invented by IBM. And Oracle doesn't seem to have gotten a license to use it.

If Oracle wins its legal battle, one ironic result will be to make the software industry less hospitable to future startups like Oracle. Incumbent software companies would have a greater ability to lock customers into their own proprietary standards. Startups wouldn't be allowed to do what Oracle did four decades ago: make its product compatible with an established competitor, then make that interoperability a selling point.

[...]Despite the lack of a licensing deal, Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz was enthusiastic when Google ultimately announced that Android would be based on Java.

"I just wanted to add my voice to the chorus of others from Sun in offering my heartfelt congratulations to Google on the announcement of their new Java/Linux phone platform, Android," Schwartz wrote.

But the company's tune changed after the Oracle acquisition. As Android adoption soared, Sun's new owners saw the opportunity to get billions of dollars out of Google. Oracle sued Google shortly after its acquisition of Sun closed.

-- submitted from IRC

Previously:
A Contrary View on API Copyrights
Amazon Unhooks its Last Oracle Database, Nothing Breaks and Life Goes On
Top Oracle Lawyer Attempting to Gaslight Entire Software Community: Insists APIs are Executable
Should an API be Copyrightable?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday March 13 2020, @06:36PM (4 children)

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Friday March 13 2020, @06:36PM (#970817) Journal

    I remember one.

    Windows 95 came out, and had long file names. At long last! Like the Macintosh. You could have long file names.

    Novell? 8.3 filenames for way too long.

    It didn't take too long before Windows Server was everywhere. Like rabbits breeding.

    --
    People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 14 2020, @02:32AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 14 2020, @02:32AM (#970988)

    Novell had long filename support before Windows 95; just needed to load os2 support on the server and add the name space to the volume.

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by dry on Saturday March 14 2020, @04:51AM (2 children)

    by dry (223) on Saturday March 14 2020, @04:51AM (#971037) Journal

    The AC is right, Netware supported long file names for a long time. For example see https://support.microfocus.com/kb/doc.php?id=1002030 [microfocus.com]. Likely MS set things up so that Netware thought Win95 was DOS.

    • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday March 16 2020, @02:03PM (1 child)

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday March 16 2020, @02:03PM (#971872) Journal

      I wouldn't be surprised at sabotage. By someone.

      --
      People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
      • (Score: 2) by dry on Monday March 16 2020, @02:44PM

        by dry (223) on Monday March 16 2020, @02:44PM (#971889) Journal

        There was a lot of it going around about the time that Win95 was released.