Tech Companies Set To Appeal 2012 Oracle Vs. Google Ruling 198
sl4shd0rk writes "In 2012, Oracle took Google to court over Java. In the balance hung the legalities of writing code to mimic the functionality of copyrighted software. The trial was set to determine how all future software would be written (and by whom). Oracle's entire case boiled down to an inadvertent 9 lines of code; an argument over a simple and basic comparison of a range of numbers. The presiding judge (who had some background in writing software) didn't buy it stating he had 'written blocks of code like rangeCheck a hundred times before.' A victory for more than just Google. This week, however, Microsoft, EMC, Oracle and Netapp have filed for appeal and seek to reverse the ruling. It's not looking good as the new bevy of judges Indicating they may side with Oracle on the issue."
As Daniel Webster once said (Score:5, Interesting)
[citation needed] (Score:3, Interesting)
Clean room not clean ... no rules for Google. (Score:0, Interesting)
It proves the clean room wasn't clean, and that is the essential issue. And given Google's broader ethos is to copy first and request permission later, it demonstrates a lack of good faith in the overall licensing deal they weren't getting on the terms they wanted. So yeah, I would be pretty pissed off if I were Sun (ORACLE).
Black letter law (Score:5, Interesting)
What's really lacking here is good quality black letter law about what copyright is supposed to do with respect to software. The courts are trying to fill a void left by our non-functional congress. The right way to be handling Microsoft's concerns is before a congressional subcommittee which can have a detailed hearings draws up legislation that goes to a committee....
Re:If they get this reversed, it will shut them do (Score:4, Interesting)
You can copyright an implementation of a language, but you cannot copyright the language itself. This view is more completely settled in EU law, but there are US cases that have reached the same conclusion.
http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~aho/cs6998/lectures/11-10-11_Zimmeck_ProtectPL.pdf [columbia.edu]
http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2013/01/sas-v-wpl-programming-languages-not.html [blogspot.com]
http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2013/january/computer-programming-languages-should-not-be-viewed-as-copyrightable-says-high-court-judge/ [out-law.com]