Google vs. Oracle Supreme Court Megathread
| electric tripping famous landscape painting | 10/07/20 | | yellow narrow-minded hunting ground stead | 10/07/20 | | spectacular half-breed site | 10/07/20 | | Razzle-dazzle frisky pistol forum | 10/07/20 | | spectacular half-breed site | 10/07/20 | | Blathering old irish cottage keepsake machete | 10/07/20 | | spectacular half-breed site | 10/07/20 | | Alcoholic nighttime turdskin | 10/07/20 | | Dun Hilarious Senate | 10/07/20 | | domesticated sable point wagecucks | 10/07/20 | | yellow narrow-minded hunting ground stead | 10/07/20 | | Cocky Stain | 10/07/20 | | duck-like space dysfunction | 10/07/20 | | Cocky Stain | 10/07/20 | | domesticated sable point wagecucks | 10/07/20 | | duck-like space dysfunction | 10/07/20 | | domesticated sable point wagecucks | 10/08/20 | | Dun Hilarious Senate | 10/07/20 | | ruby office | 10/08/20 | | wine vigorous faggot firefighter double fault | 10/08/20 | | spectacular half-breed site | 10/08/20 | | hairraiser heaven | 10/08/20 | | bearded gaping | 10/08/20 | | Dun Hilarious Senate | 10/08/20 | | bearded gaping | 10/08/20 | | Dun Hilarious Senate | 10/08/20 | | duck-like space dysfunction | 10/08/20 | | ruby office | 10/08/20 | | fluffy nursing home | 10/08/20 | | duck-like space dysfunction | 10/08/20 | | ruby office | 10/09/20 | | duck-like space dysfunction | 10/09/20 | | ruby office | 10/09/20 | | duck-like space dysfunction | 10/09/20 | | ruby office | 10/10/20 | | duck-like space dysfunction | 10/13/20 | | ruby office | 04/06/21 | | Chocolate apoplectic theater stage | 04/06/21 | | Alcoholic nighttime turdskin | 10/07/20 | | wild 180 institution | 10/07/20 | | spectacular half-breed site | 10/07/20 | | light mad-dog skullcap plaza | 10/08/20 | | electric tripping famous landscape painting | 10/07/20 | | provocative misunderstood resort | 10/07/20 | | ruby office | 10/07/20 | | provocative misunderstood resort | 10/07/20 | | ruby office | 10/07/20 | | overrated business firm | 10/07/20 | | spectacular half-breed site | 10/07/20 | | Laughsome drunken philosopher-king | 10/07/20 | | spectacular half-breed site | 10/07/20 | | ruby office | 10/07/20 | | spectacular half-breed site | 10/07/20 | | garnet contagious rigpig station | 10/07/20 | | out-of-control shrine pozpig | 10/07/20 | | Saffron property | 10/07/20 | | yellow narrow-minded hunting ground stead | 10/07/20 | | spectacular half-breed site | 10/07/20 | | ruby office | 10/07/20 | | spectacular half-breed site | 10/07/20 | | yellow narrow-minded hunting ground stead | 10/07/20 | | maroon den party of the first part | 10/07/20 | | yellow narrow-minded hunting ground stead | 10/07/20 | | Razzle-dazzle frisky pistol forum | 10/08/20 | | garnet contagious rigpig station | 10/07/20 | | maroon den party of the first part | 10/07/20 | | duck-like space dysfunction | 10/07/20 | | spectacular half-breed site | 10/07/20 | | duck-like space dysfunction | 10/07/20 | | spectacular half-breed site | 10/07/20 | | duck-like space dysfunction | 10/07/20 | | scarlet zippy hospital | 10/07/20 | | duck-like space dysfunction | 10/07/20 | | scarlet zippy hospital | 10/07/20 | | duck-like space dysfunction | 10/07/20 | | scarlet zippy hospital | 10/07/20 | | duck-like space dysfunction | 10/08/20 | | salmon toaster | 10/07/20 | | effete state | 10/07/20 | | bearded gaping | 10/09/20 | | Brindle water buffalo base | 10/09/20 | | Sickened trip brunch mood | 10/08/20 | | hyperactive pit | 10/09/20 | | Brindle water buffalo base | 10/09/20 | | Comical Internet-worthy University Selfie | 10/09/20 | | ruby office | 04/06/21 | | duck-like space dysfunction | 04/06/21 | | Saffron property | 04/05/21 | | elite puppy | 04/05/21 | | duck-like space dysfunction | 04/06/21 | | ruby office | 04/06/21 | | Chocolate apoplectic theater stage | 04/06/21 | | duck-like space dysfunction | 04/06/21 |
Poast new message in this thread
|
Date: October 7th, 2020 11:18 AM Author: spectacular half-breed site
Oracle owns X
Google wanted to use X
Oracle said no
Google built their own X in a way that copies certain aspect of it
Oracle said u cant do that
Google said no u
Lawyers have been fat and happy since
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4644868&forum_id=2#41064844) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2020 11:06 AM Author: ruby office
I don’t know why I’m doing this for you assfucks, but I’ll give you a real summary. In programming, an overarching principle is that you make self-contained and consistent pieces of code block that fit together and can be easily replaced or tested on their own. This is how people can use code from open source or how divisions across large companies can all contribute to the same code base without stepping on each others’ toes. This is a dumb example, but one piece of code might gather data from everywhere and prepare it in a series of arrays. Another might take arrays, and spit out either a batch of K-means clustered classifications or an error. Then another might take classified batches, and match them with ads to serve. Each step has no responsibility for what goes on inside another step. They just know what data goes in, what data comes out and what the function is called. In this way, you can just call a KMeans function, and people swap in and out all the stuff behind it, and the rest of the chain is unaffected. These are called interfaces.
Now, google, in its early years played fast and loose with integrating code their didn’t have their rights to. In one such case, they used some Java library owned by Sun. Sun brought this up, and google removed the Sun code and replaced it with code they wrote themselves. Problem is, in order to effectively swap it out, they left the interface the same. Same input, same output and same function name. And in most cases it was absolutely trivial. Like one poster said, things like the double max(double, double) function. They had to remove the part where Java wrote code for which number was larger, and returned the larger one. Oracle is suing not because google copied its max function, but because they’re calling their max function “max”. Of note, this is not limited to just the max function and I do not know specifically if the max function is even part of this. All I know is most of the code here is pretty trivial.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4644868&forum_id=2#41072922) |
|
Date: October 9th, 2020 2:11 PM Author: duck-like space dysfunction
I mean, if you want to re-write over a century of copyright precedent, that's fine. But that's not really what a court should be doing.
"This is copyrighting “, and” as a method of joining two independent clauses."
No, it's really not, for at least the reason that ", and" is not original to any person alive.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4644868&forum_id=2#41081201) |
|
Date: October 9th, 2020 5:57 PM Author: duck-like space dysfunction
If you want to retry the evidence in the case, that's one thing, but there doesn't seem to be any dispute that the originality requirement for the code at issue was met, which is what you're now arguing.
It sounds like you don't know much about copyright law, and are arguing based on what you want the law to be, not what the law is.
You can argue "this shouldn't be protectable" all you want, but the court is deciding whether this *is* protectable.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4644868&forum_id=2#41082491)
|
|
Date: October 13th, 2020 1:47 PM Author: duck-like space dysfunction
Roe v. Wade was a poorly reasoned decision. If you're in favor of poorly-reasoned decisions, then we have a fundamental disagreement.
I generally fall in the camp where I prefer courts to apply the law cleanly even if it reaches a suboptimal result, thereby forcing the legislature to improve the law.
In this case, though, SCOTUS could probably reverse the Fed. Cir. on fair use in a way that doesn't fuck up the legal precedent.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4644868&forum_id=2#41103669) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2020 11:32 AM Author: spectacular half-breed site
from wikipedia
Industry and legal experts had stated an Oracle victory could create a chilling effect in software development, with copyright holders using the copyright on APIs to prevent their use in developing interoperable alternatives through reverse engineering, as common in open source software development.[77][78][79] At the same time, a judgement favoring Google's position may weaken protection for copyright for software code developers, allowing competitors with better resources to develop improved products from smaller firms, and reduce the motive for innovation within the industry.[80][81]
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4644868&forum_id=2#41064955)
|
Date: October 7th, 2020 2:03 PM Author: garnet contagious rigpig station
Sun Microsystems, who developed Java, was cool with Google’s use. But Oracle bought Sun and Oracle are dicks. They’re trying to copyright APIs which are basically the way the software talks to other software (ie it’s purely functional).
This would really hamper software dev and make it much harder for startups of the court rules for Oracle.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4644868&forum_id=2#41065953) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2020 2:49 PM Author: duck-like space dysfunction
Basically, because it meets all the elements for copyright protection, and does not fit into any of the exclusions.
The quantum of originality needed for protection is extremely low. The scenes-a-faire and merger doctrines that a lot of people try to use to create an "interoperability" exclusion don't really fit, and would have to be given special application in the software context that they don't get in any other context.
If I need to use your characters to create my own sequel to your novel, that doesn't make your characters unprotectable under the scenes a faire or merger doctrines.
The Federal Circuit opinion on this basically mirrors arguments I had to make 10-15 years ago in another case, which I think are the right arguments.
The closer question is whether copying/use of headers for interoperability purposes should or can be considered a fair use, and whether that is entirely up to the fact finder.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4644868&forum_id=2#41066282) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2020 2:57 PM Author: scarlet zippy hospital
> exclusions
Software functionality isn’t really the type of subject matter that should fall under copyright. We already have patents for that. Oracle sued on their patents too, and lost on those claims.
17 USC 102:
(b) In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4644868&forum_id=2#41066342) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2020 3:19 PM Author: scarlet zippy hospital
The idea/expression dichotomy is only one of the aspects of the exception.
The “method”, “process” seem more of a functional/non-functional dichotomy. This same dichotomy exists in trademarks/patents.
Google *is* asking that functional aspects to be deemed not protectable under 102(b).
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4644868&forum_id=2#41066482) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2020 3:41 PM Author: duck-like space dysfunction
"The idea/expression dichotomy is only one of the aspects of the exception."
I, and a good amount of caselaw, disagree.
"The “method”, “process” seem more of a functional/non-functional dichotomy. This same dichotomy exists in trademarks/patents."
Except the Copyright Act excludes literary works (i.e., software code) from the "useful article" limitations of Section 113. This normally how copyright deals with issues of functionality, and it doesn't apply to software.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4644868&forum_id=2#41066601) |
Date: October 7th, 2020 5:26 PM Author: effete state
Amazing how much Google has poured into this issue that would have been clear cut 10 years ago (and still is, tbh). Should be easy win for Oracle. But every tech company is trying to convince Roberts that the sky will fall if Google loses. Hint: it won’t, but Roberts and the Chamber of Commerce cucks could buy it.
Lol @ the erosion of IP protections to help big tech build its dominance.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4644868&forum_id=2#41067240) |
Date: October 9th, 2020 5:50 PM Author: Brindle water buffalo base
If the summaries ITT are accurate, I'm with Google all the way
Copyright is for rewarding creativity not for being a bar on functionality.
Oracle counsel are annoying and run a sloppy ship too
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4644868&forum_id=2#41082446) |
|
|