So Oracle has won... something.
I'm scared that Google has won this with a spectacular Oracle pyrrhic victory. But we as software developers may be losing in a big way.
If Oracle gets to copyright a basic rangecheck function, things are going to get really annoying.
I wish I could talk to a copyright judge and make this argument:
"Can you copyright the word 'is'?" (I assume no)
"Can you copyright the words 'greater than'?" (again I assume no)
"Can you copyright the words 'greater than this but less than that'?" (again I assume no)
And really, right there, you have pseudocode for rangecheck. For the java version, well, basically, you're just with a dialect translations: "Can you copyright the words 'superieure a cette mais inferieure a celle'?" (French google translate, and again I assume no).
I mean, it's not even a quote. There is no depth of meaning, or abstract reference, or hidden commentary. It is a direct request statement, basic functional language. How can that be copyrighted?
I mean, imagine the lawsuits that come out of this. Patent armories don't help for defense. Only writing tons and tons of library code and copyrighting it. You might have tons of excess software written just so they can sue other people for doing similar stuff.
I'm scared that Google has won this with a spectacular Oracle pyrrhic victory. But we as software developers may be losing in a big way.
If Oracle gets to copyright a basic rangecheck function, things are going to get really annoying.
I wish I could talk to a copyright judge and make this argument:
"Can you copyright the word 'is'?" (I assume no)
"Can you copyright the words 'greater than'?" (again I assume no)
"Can you copyright the words 'greater than this but less than that'?" (again I assume no)
And really, right there, you have pseudocode for rangecheck. For the java version, well, basically, you're just with a dialect translations: "Can you copyright the words 'superieure a cette mais inferieure a celle'?" (French google translate, and again I assume no).
I mean, it's not even a quote. There is no depth of meaning, or abstract reference, or hidden commentary. It is a direct request statement, basic functional language. How can that be copyrighted?
I mean, imagine the lawsuits that come out of this. Patent armories don't help for defense. Only writing tons and tons of library code and copyrighting it. You might have tons of excess software written just so they can sue other people for doing similar stuff.
