API Copyright (Google vs Oracle).
-
You have not seen the patents that are our there... haven't you? i.e. Unlock a device by sliding your finger on the screen: Patented (as idea) and there was a trial too (AFAIK its veredict was against all common sense) So... I would not bet on this one.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
Amazon patented a concept they call, "one-click ordering." The patent situation in the USA is out of control.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
-
Amazon patented a concept they call, "one-click ordering." The patent situation in the USA is out of control.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
Can I patent a 'one-flick' insult? Two, if you want to use both hands! Instant moneybags! :-D
-
Hopefully all those judges and high courts with decades of experience with copyright laws and the extensive details of the actual case come here to find the answer to their legal quandary from some guy on the internet. Who knows why the case has turned out to be so complex given how simple the issue apparently is.
They would first have to agree on the difference between an "argument" and a "parameter." :-\
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it. ― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
-
Amazon patented a concept they call, "one-click ordering." The patent situation in the USA is out of control.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
I think that's more "branding" than some real process. If you think about, it's probably filling in a bunch of boxes and then using "one click" to send it off. Like "one-stop shopping". (Forget about the traffic lights)
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it. ― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
-
Amazon patented a concept they call, "one-click ordering." The patent situation in the USA is out of control.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
There is also a patent on saving what's displayed on a screen before overlaying it, so that it can be easily restored without redrawing what was there before. This kind of thing is why I think all software patents should be cancelled and replaced by copyrights.
Robust Services Core | Software Techniques for Lemmings | Articles
The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing. -
I think that's more "branding" than some real process. If you think about, it's probably filling in a bunch of boxes and then using "one click" to send it off. Like "one-stop shopping". (Forget about the traffic lights)
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it. ― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
That should fall under a trademark, not a patent.
Robust Services Core | Software Techniques for Lemmings | Articles
The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing. -
Can I patent a 'one-flick' insult? Two, if you want to use both hands! Instant moneybags! :-D
I am going to patent the human walk and all it's variants.
-
I am going to patent the human walk and all it's variants.
I thought Monty Python's already been there. Or was that only the silly ones?
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello Never stop dreaming - Freddie Kruger
-
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
Hopefully all those judges and high courts with decades of experience with copyright laws and the extensive details of the actual case come here to find the answer to their legal quandary from some guy on the internet.
Probably they should, because they do lack the technical knowledge about the possible implications that their veredict might have worldwide.
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
Who knows why the case has turned out to be so complex given how simple the issue apparently is.
Are we not speaking about trials, companies with a lot of lawyers and a possible big $$$ involved at the end? I would say it was not to expect anything else.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
Nelek wrote:
Probably they should, because they do lack the technical knowledge about the possible implications that their veredict might have worldwide.
That's quite patronising TBH, don't you think the complexity and depth of the laws involved are 1,000,000 times more difficult to grasp than understanding what an API is?
-
Amazon patented a concept they call, "one-click ordering." The patent situation in the USA is out of control.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
Thankfully having a patent and upholding it aren't the same thing. There certainly are lots of patents granted in the past that certainly wouldn't be granted today, and some patents have also been reversed as upholding them would stifle entire industries.
-
I think that's more "branding" than some real process. If you think about, it's probably filling in a bunch of boxes and then using "one click" to send it off. Like "one-stop shopping". (Forget about the traffic lights)
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it. ― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
-
The "swipe" is a particular technique, involving the device and the user, electronically, digitally, timings, offset, displacements, speed, pressure, etc. A lot more complex a scenario than a digital "promise". An "API" can be 1 method / call; or thousands; or a subset; or a hyper-set; ... We could start by eliminating "text speak" which has been piggy backing on a known language. Or make them pay a royalty.
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it. ― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
Gerry Schmitz wrote:
The "swipe" is
Thanks for correcting me and giving me the correct word in such a nice way ;)
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
That is a great example of precedence! A BIOS is a great example of an API. It's not high level like the one at issue, java, but that is definitely a software API where the application is the computer's operating system and, effectively, all programs that run on it.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
And Oracle can't be unaware of it. So, what's different here?
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello Never stop dreaming - Freddie Kruger
-
And Oracle can't be unaware of it. So, what's different here?
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello Never stop dreaming - Freddie Kruger
It has become a matter of convincing judges to see it. To those of us in the software world it's fairly obvious, I think.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
-
It has become a matter of convincing judges to see it. To those of us in the software world it's fairly obvious, I think.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
I honestly haven't followed it enough to have an informed opinion. But generally, I'm of the opinion that the patenting system is completely bollocks at the moment.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello Never stop dreaming - Freddie Kruger
-
An "API" is not "code"; it's a "promise" (or maybe only a hint). It's like saying: if Java had a "GetApple()" method, no one else can use it without paying a royalty; even though said API might: - returned an orange instead of an apple - picked an apple from a tree vs a bin - also washed or peeled the apple (optional parameter with default) - returned Adam's apple - etc. An API is not code; the implementation (and how it is implemented) is. Let's see if the enlightened judiciary gets it.
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it. ― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
After reading this report : U.S. Supreme Court divided over Google bid to end Oracle copyright suit[^], it's pretty easy to see who gets it and who doesn't.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
-
I honestly haven't followed it enough to have an informed opinion. But generally, I'm of the opinion that the patenting system is completely bollocks at the moment.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello Never stop dreaming - Freddie Kruger
Jörgen Andersson wrote:
I'm of the opinion that the patenting system is completely bollocks at the moment.
Like 90% of the people with common sense and not involved directly with it.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
After reading this report : U.S. Supreme Court divided over Google bid to end Oracle copyright suit[^], it's pretty easy to see who gets it and who doesn't.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
Specially the last paragraph :doh: :sigh: X|
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
Nelek wrote:
Probably they should, because they do lack the technical knowledge about the possible implications that their veredict might have worldwide.
That's quite patronising TBH, don't you think the complexity and depth of the laws involved are 1,000,000 times more difficult to grasp than understanding what an API is?
Patronising or not, the "possible implications that their verdict might have" are completely irrelevant to deciding a matter of law. Besides which, education and background in law does not teach you what an API is. That's not to say that a lawyer or judge is incapable of understanding the concept, or indeed of doing so quickly. However they need to gain that knowledge from somewhere, and somewhere that is well informed and authoritative. This is one thing "expert witnesses" do - provide a (hopefully unbiased) explanation of how to interpret domain-specific terminology and concepts. In the UK, if you consider yourself to be an authority on a particular subject, you can submit your details to one of several expert witness directories and you can earn good money by sharing your expertise in court. Generally speaking, though, you do need to be very, very, very good.
-
An "API" is not "code"; it's a "promise" (or maybe only a hint). It's like saying: if Java had a "GetApple()" method, no one else can use it without paying a royalty; even though said API might: - returned an orange instead of an apple - picked an apple from a tree vs a bin - also washed or peeled the apple (optional parameter with default) - returned Adam's apple - etc. An API is not code; the implementation (and how it is implemented) is. Let's see if the enlightened judiciary gets it.
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it. ― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
Experience tells me building an API is often more work than building the guts. And it often involves more creativity. Now, do I want to preclude someone being able to assert a copyright over something that is unique and imbued with creativity and a lot of work? Gotta say "no". One good thing might come out of this: Licenses should cover implementation and API as separate items.
