Google now a convicted criminal!

Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by smoledman, May 7, 2012.

  1. smoledman macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2011
    #1
  2. miles01110 macrumors Core

    miles01110

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Location:
    The Ivory Tower (I'm not coming down)
    #2
    Actually you can't be convicted as a criminal in civil court. :rolleyes:
     
  3. KnightWRX macrumors Pentium

    KnightWRX

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Location:
    Quebec, Canada
    #3
    And if you actually read intelligent converage on the story, you'll find that the Jury has not ruled that at all :

    http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120507122749740

    Basically, this goes 2 ways from now, and in both cases, Google wins. The press coverage on this decision has been awful.

    Not to mention there were no convictions, only a jury verdict, one which wasn't unanimous on all questions, thus would force a retrial on Q1s and Q4.
     
  4. roadbloc macrumors G3

    roadbloc

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Location:
    UK
    #4
    Yawn. Big companies try and worm their way around the law all the time for one reason or another (usually money). Some succeed. Some don't.
     
  5. KnightWRX macrumors Pentium

    KnightWRX

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Location:
    Quebec, Canada
    #5
    Except there is no worming here. Google basically did what the GNU project did with the ANSI C API, they re-implemented it from scratch (well, not exactly since they used Apache Harmony's implementation, but that's pretty close).

    If Oracle were to win this copyright case, it would make things like glibc or any other C library that is not made by Bell Labs (now AT&T) infringe on the original copyright of the work of Denis Ritchie and Brian Kerrnighan.

    This would be a massive blow to computer science in general, hence all the experts that testified on the difference between the API specification vs the API implementation. Anyway, this jury decision was mostly expected to be like it was, as it was in line with the judge's instruction. He made it clear : judge on the basis of whether Google copied or didn't copy the Java API specifications, I will judge on whether such a thing can be copyrighted with current law.

    Basically, yesterday's decision was a big non-decision, except for the 9 lines of actual implementation code that was found in infringment. Those 9 lines out of millions were already presented as having "no value" by Oracle's own lawyers.

    The amount of FUD on this one is going to be so great... Too bad people won't bother to follow up when there's an actual story to report.
     
  6. kdarling macrumors demi-god

    kdarling

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    First university coding class = 47 years ago
    #6
    ZDNet has a rather alarmist article about the trial so far.

    The muddled mess of the Oracle vs. Google trial

    Basically, it says two things:

    1) Only 9 worthless lines of coder have been found so far to have been copied.

    2) The jury, made up of non-techies, seems to have decided that APIs are copyrightable. Which would make a total mess of today's computing landscape.

    Caveat: I'm not really paying attention to it, so I present this only for general interest.
     
  7. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #7
    god help us if this does not get over ruled and thrown out. We will see more crap law suits. It would make a complete and utter cluster **** of the computing landscape.
     
  8. smoledman thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2011
    #8
    This lawsuit is bad news for code thieves like Google. Maybe they should innovate instead of ripping off other people's innovations. Samsung better take note as well, they're about to be given the "death penalty" in courts worldwide for copying the iPhone & iPad.
     
  9. FX120 macrumors 65816

    FX120

    Joined:
    May 18, 2007
    #9
    Seriously?
     
  10. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #10
    I just write post off like that as the standard SOP for Apple fans. They do not see the larger issue here that this is bad bad bad for the computing world and open source community.
    This is bad if API's can be copyrighted. That going to do massive damage to best practices in coding and design.
     
  11. KnightWRX macrumors Pentium

    KnightWRX

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Location:
    Quebec, Canada
    #11
    Code thieves ? Google used Apache's Harmony project, under the Apache license, for the J2SE implementation. What code did Google thieve anyhow ?

    Guys, stop quoting people on my ignore list, I put them there for a reason, because of posts like that with obviously no grounds and basis in reality. ;)
     
  12. smoledman thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2011
    #12
    I work as a programmer and I can't just straight up use code without showing the copyright.
     
  13. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #13
    Yes you could. If you were caught that'd be another story. You could be sued, civilly that is.
     
  14. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #14
    Straight up code yes. But there is a difference between an API and code.
     
  15. miles01110 macrumors Core

    miles01110

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Location:
    The Ivory Tower (I'm not coming down)
    #15
    Maybe you should think of something original instead of reciting from the Steve Jobs biography. It's ok to have independent thoughts... really!
     
  16. KnightWRX macrumors Pentium

    KnightWRX

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Location:
    Quebec, Canada
    #16
    If you're a programmer, you should then understand the difference between a function prototype and a function's implementation. See page 52 of Google's slides if you don't :

    http://www.groklaw.net/pdf3/OraGoogle-Trial-GoogleOpeningStills.pdf

    (And if you don't, you're a really bad programmer).

    The only implementation that was identical between Android's implementation and Oracle's JDK was the rangeCheck function. 9 lines of code. Valued at 0$ by Oracle's lawyer.

    The other copyright is being asserted over function prototypes. Yes, over :

    Code:
    public int compareTo(String anotherString)
    Oracle is claiming that the API design and specification fall under copyright. This would make libc also illegal. It would make Apple's use of POSIX illegal. It would make anyone reimplementing an API from a specification illegal. Think GNUStep, Mono, Wine.

    Which is just utterly ridiculous. If as a programmer you can't recognized that, sorry, you're just a bad programmer.

    So I don't believe you're a programmer. That or you're not interested in facts, just in spreading FUD since again, the decision did not go well for Oracle, Google wasn't "convicted" of anything much less are they a "criminal" since this is a civil suit.

    Gah, he's on my ignore list guys! I suggest you do the same.
     
  17. roadbloc macrumors G3

    roadbloc

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Location:
    UK
    #17
    I highly doubt your first point based on what I've seen from your posts.
     
  18. Oletros macrumors 603

    Oletros

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Location:
    Premià de Mar
    #18
    Not exactly, the jury was instructed by Judge Alsup to assume that API's are copyrighteable despite that this question has to be decided by him

    ----------

    You really have not read anything about the ruling, do you?
     
  19. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #19
    KnightWRX pretty much summed this one up, this would set a terrible precedence and definitely would hamper innovation across the map.

    I had to chuckle at the title, makes it sound like corporations are actually people.... oh wait.
     
  20. KnightWRX macrumors Pentium

    KnightWRX

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Location:
    Quebec, Canada
    #20
    I take no credit. Groklaw's coverage as been pristine, as always. I just happen to have read it in the last 2 weeks, following the trial was quite interesting.
     
  21. Oletros macrumors 603

    Oletros

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Location:
    Premià de Mar
    #21
    And now, the jury says that Google doesn't infringes any claim of the two patens
     
  22. ChazUK macrumors 603

    ChazUK

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Location:
    Essex (UK)
    #22
    Good old Florian boy was right about everything.

    Or not.
     
  23. Oletros macrumors 603

    Oletros

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Location:
    Premià de Mar
    #23
    He's right, the one to blame is Judge Alsup that has misguided the jury and thay have decided on the wrong side
     
  24. LethalWolfe macrumors G3

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #24
     
  25. KnightWRX macrumors Pentium

    KnightWRX

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Location:
    Quebec, Canada
    #25
    So what's left of the lawsuit that was supposed to bury Android ?

    9 lines of code (rangeCheck) which could have been written by a 12 year old according to the judge and are worth nothing according to Oracle lawyers, and a question about the copyrightability of APIs which everyone in the industry agrees would be a completely bad thing. Not to mention the EU already ruled it non-copyrightable.

    Where are the billions in damages now ? This as all been a big farce by Oracle and anyone that was rooting for them is now stuck with their feet firmly entrenched in their mouthes.
     

Share This Page