Day 3 of Oracle v. Google: Larry Page bests David Boies

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120418212325628

by grellas • 14 years ago

77 26 14 years ago

zmanji• 14 years ago

I'm not sure what is being contested in the case any more. Larry Page testified that their implementation of Java was a clean room implementation. Is Oracle trying to assert that an API is something that is subject to copyright?

caf• 14 years ago

The trial is examining both copyright and patent issues. But yes, one of the things Oracle is claiming is that they can copyright their API and you can't reimplement it without a license.

This does not seem like it should fly, in my inexpert opinion.

fpgeek• 14 years ago

If it does fly, Oracle is going to have a lot of fun.

For instance, Oracle copied SQL from IBM years before it was a standard. There's also Sun's involvement in Wabi. I'm sure Microsoft wouldn't mind extracting some cash for that "infringement".

acchow• 14 years ago

It shouldn't fly. We already went through this with IBM's BIOS and its clones in the 80's.

wmf• 14 years ago

We've been discussing this extensively in other threads: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3862782 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3859361 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3854767

onli• 14 years ago

But the answer is yes, they try to say an api is subject to coypright (in the article is a list of challenged points, including apis).

mturmon• 14 years ago

Misspells the Oracle software architect Edward Screven as Edward Serevan throughout.

Estragon2• 14 years ago

What is SSO?

Nogwater• 14 years ago

I just searched the linked page and found this: SSO (Sequence, Structure, Organization).

Estragon2• 14 years ago

Thanks.

cheald2• 14 years ago

Strong play by Google's lawyers here.

    Google: This means that a JME app may not run on a JavaCard device?
    Edward Serevan: Yes.
    Google: There are different APIs between JavaCard and JSE?
    Edward Serevan: [Some disagreement over the differences between versions.]
    Google: There are differences between JSE, JEE, JME, and Java Card?
    Edward Serevan: Yes.
    Google: How can it be that (Oracle can say that Java is WORA)?
    Edward Serevan: Oracle defines WORA as across platforms [different operating systems], not Java versions.

I'm not sure how Oracle is going to get the assertion that Google caused significant damage to the Java ecosystem by their violation of WORA to stick here, in light of this testimony. By any objective measure, Google has created a new platform for Dalvik in Android.

JamisonM4• 14 years ago

They are going to assert the Android is for phones, and J2ME is for phones. Thus Android broke their WORA definition for that platform. Seems fairly straightforward and that Google is kind of making their case for them.

(Just to clarify: I think Oracle should, and is likely to lose their case.)

cheald2• 14 years ago

I think that's easily trumped, though, because "phones" are not a platform. They're a form factor. Otherwise, J2ME should run on iPhones and Windows 7 devices.

Part of the whole Android package is a hardware specification [1]. Android The Product is a platform, which consists of a compatible hardware device and a Dalvik VM with Android APIs. It isn't just the software. J2ME might happen to run on some handheld battery-powered computers, but a form factor does not a platform make.

[1] http://static.googleusercontent.com/external_content/untrust...

_ea1k• 14 years ago

Also: "Edward Serevan: I wouldn't characterize the JSE as being only for laptops and desktops. Smartphones have become capable enough to run the JSE."

It looks like their expectation was that JSE would run on phones as well. So they were already planning fragmentation at this level.

stretchwithme• 14 years ago

How strange is it that Eric Schmidt guided the development of the very software Google is now accused of copying?

pcullen• 14 years ago

Oracle mobile phone plans revealed

http://ofb.net/~pcullen/ophone/ophone.html

fletchowns• 14 years ago

Gonna start to get pricey with multi-core phones.

Steko2• 14 years ago

I enjoy reading both the incredibly biased but still informative Groklaw and then the incredibly biased in the opposite direction (and paid by MS/Oracle) Florian Mueller. Looking past the thinly veiled cheerleading isn't that hard once you realize where they're coming from and both seem fairly thorough.

But what would be really awesome is if there was somewhere I could go for legal tech blogging that isn't always good or bad news for open source.

Nilay Patel and Matt Macari at the Verge do a good job but coverage isn't as regular as what you'll get by checking Groklaw daily and it gets lost in the Verge-o-polis.

ZeroGravitas• 14 years ago

I've always found the Nilay Patel legal coverage, despite his qualifications, to be overwhelmingly tainted by whatever the Apple fanbase would currently like to be legally true. Like Florian I think he has a direct monetary incentive for taking a certain view and presenting it as objective.

mdaniel• 14 years ago

I mean this honestly: what makes you think Groklaw is biased? That deosn't match my [uninformed] mental model of their site.

Steko2• 14 years ago

I don't think PJ ever hid the fact that she was advocating in a certain direction, quoth wiki:

"Groklaw publishes articles (both news and opinion) from a self-described pro-FOSS, anti-FUD perspective"

The comments are similarly policed to comply with this. This certainly isn't a secret, as Florian Mueller's deals with MS and Oracle were, and I don't think I'm making a wild accusation here.

Back in the day a 100% anti-SCO line worked great because SCO was a fraud. But the current issues are murkier and the one sidedness of the site now sticks out like the news channel at your grandparents house.

Day 3 of Oracle v. Google: Larry Page bests David Boies

Related Stories