|
I thinks shaggar was right and the jury sided with the company they were familiar with because Google didn't even make a case for themselves
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 07:49 |
|
|
triple sulk posted:gently caress google this, but also we got The Good Outcome
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
quiggy posted:this, but also we got The Good Outcome lol it's not the good outcome at all
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
triple sulk posted:gently caress oracle
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
Ludwig van Halen posted:I thinks shaggar was right and the jury sided with the company they were familiar with because Google didn't even make a case for themselves i agree. this won't last on appeal quiggy posted:this, but also we got The Good Outcome this isn't a good outcome and will be overturned.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
triple sulk posted:lol it's not the good outcome at all explain yourself
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:jury found fair use. i think it's overturned on appeal. but this is a finding of fact? isn't the best case for oracle that the jury instructions were wrong and they get ANOTHER trial on fair use?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
quiggy posted:explain yourself it flies in the face of all extant copyright laws. google's infringement doesn't actually fall under the provided provisions of fair use.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
quiggy posted:explain yourself Designing non-trivial APIs is extremely difficult
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:but this is a finding of fact? isn't the best case for oracle that the jury instructions were wrong and they get ANOTHER trial on fair use? no, the appellate court can overturn the finding of fair use. there won't be another jury trial.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
Ludwig van Halen posted:I thinks shaggar was right and the jury sided with the company they were familiar with because Google didn't even make a case for themselves Or, amusingly, very aware of oracle (and how they operate).
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
well there might be another trial regarding damages to award.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Award them damages for future lawsuits incase they may instigate them, like their per-core policy.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:well there might be another trial regarding damages to award. then maybe the jury will go full USAFL and award them $1
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/735928131253469184
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/735923806368190464 lmao victory by brand loyalty
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
it was a total shitfest and should never have been a jury trial. goog managed to confuse the poo poo out of the entire issue because the API was already declared copyrighted and goog was already declared to have used it, and this case was about if it was fair use. theres absolutely no case for googs use being fair use.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
the verdict its seriously hosed up
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:it was a total shitfest and should never have been a jury trial. goog managed to confuse the poo poo out of the entire issue because the API was already declared copyrighted and goog was already declared to have used it, and this case was about if it was fair use. theres absolutely no case for googs use being fair use. Shaggar posted:the verdict its seriously hosed up 
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:lmao victory by brand loyalty
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
the jury instructions said java was free at the time, so the jury just figured google's use of it is fair
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
well I guess I'm OK with this for now
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
yeah it was a combo of brand loyalty and jurors not understanding java was free to use, but not to distribute modified copies. Microsoft got sued for the exact same thing by sun back then. theres litterrally no defense for fair use.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
yeah but Larry doesn't get nine billion dollars now
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
triple sulk posted:u see what happens larry
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:58
|
|
|
so who is the better tech ceo? larry or larry?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
Hopefully someone can clear this up for me: if Oracle won would that mean Oracle would have the right to go after anyone who used Java's API? If they're able to copyright Java.lang is it right to assume any app that has used Java could be charged for not using it in fair use? Or did google make their own language based off of Java and try to license that code without Java's consent?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
Nude posted:Hopefully someone can clear this up for me: if Oracle won would that mean Oracle would have the right to go after anyone who used Java's API? If they're able to copyright Java.lang is it right to assume any app that has used Java could be charged for not using it in fair use? the second
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
Nude posted:Hopefully someone can clear this up for me: if Oracle won would that mean Oracle would have the right to go after anyone who used Java's API? If they're able to copyright Java.lang is it right to assume any app that has used Java could be charged for not using it in fair use? the second one.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
oracle can't charge programmers for using java.lang despite holding the copyright because they already granted a general license for programmers to use it for free. no take-backs they however did not grant a license for programmers to incorporate java.lang into their own sdk. but now the jury has found that it's fair use to do so anyway, so welp
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 22:42
|
|
|
Nude posted:Hopefully someone can clear this up for me: if Oracle won would that mean Oracle would have the right to go after anyone who used Java's API? If they're able to copyright Java.lang is it right to assume any app that has used Java could be charged for not using it in fair use? google built their language based off of java without java's consent with full knowledge they needed to get a license and didn't. Sun/Oracle has already successfully sued people in the past for improper or unlicensed implementations of the Java API. Most notably: Microsoft. Existing implementations likely already have licensing agreements with Oracle or they are full implementations. Also the java language itself is not copyrighted so if someone built their own VM and standard lib in java there would be no contest. But instead of doing that, oracle specifically chose to implement parts of the Sun/Oracle copyrighted API. In the past cases on this it was already ruled that goog definitely copied the java standard lib APIs and that oracle could copyright those apis. Those were the important cases. This one was about fair use which should have been a no brainer that "no it was definitely not fair use", but this jury was dumb as poo poo and the judge let things get out of hand.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
fair use, a way for individuals to use copyrighted material for educational and non commercial use, now allows mega corporations to steal from each other with impunity and make billions doing it
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
on the one hand lol gently caress copyright but on the other hand srsly gently caress google 
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
Ludwig van Halen posted:fair use, a way for individuals to use copyrighted material for educational and non commercial use, now allows mega corporations to steal from each other with impunity and make billions doing it The logical extension of "corporations are people".
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
vodkat posted:on the one hand lol gently caress copyright but on the other hand srsly gently caress google
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
i hope you're all ready for season 3, this isn't going to end soon!
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:and on the other hand gently caress oracle
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 23:37
|
|
|
Stymie posted:somewhere in a mock japanese village a man is crushing a delicate tea cup in his bare hand
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 07:49 |
|
|
Nude posted:Hopefully someone can clear this up for me: if Oracle won would that mean Oracle would have the right to go after anyone who used Java's API? If they're able to copyright Java.lang is it right to assume any app that has used Java could be charged for not using it in fair use? ok i'm seeing this opinion pop up everywhere and it's real frustrating: why the gently caress would oracle sue people for using their own language that they're trying to get everyone to use??
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 23:54
|
|