Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Oracle The Courts Google

Oracle Exec Mocks Google Arguments About Java's APIs (thehill.com) 145

"Whether it is consumers' data or competitors' code, Google's view seems to be the same: What's mine is mine, and what's yours is mine," argues Oracle executive vice president Kenneth Glueck.

Google had urged America's Supreme Court to rule in their ongoing legal case about access to Java's APIs, a case which Google says hinges on "whether developers should be able to create new applications using standard ways of accessing common functions. Those functions are the building blocks of computer programming, letting developers easily assemble the range of applications and tools we all use every day. Making it harder to connect with those functions would lock developers into existing platforms, thus reducing competition and, ultimately, hurting consumers. Access to software interfaces like these is the key to interoperability, the foundation of great software development."

That editorial -- written by Google's senior vice president for global affairs, Kent Walker, notes that 175 startups, developers, academics and other tech companies (including Microsoft) are also asking the Supreme Court to hear this case. Google warns of a risk to innovation posed if companies like Oracle become "gatekeepers to interoperability," calling it "a defining battle of the digital era."

Oracle's executive responds that "There are many 'defining battles' of the digital era -- 5G, Artificial Intelligence, autonomous devices -- but Oracle v. Google is surely not among them." Only in Google's world does weaker intellectual property protection lead to more innovation. It is settled in law and in economics that the opposite is true. And at a time when the U.S. is circling the globe to enhance the protection of U.S. intellectual property -- including strong copyright protection -- Google takes the opposite view...

In a stunning what's-up-is-down and down-is-up statement, Walker attempts to wrap Google in the cloak of interoperability. Java defined the era of interoperability with its "write once, run everywhere" architecture. It was Google that copied Java, built Android around it, and altered it so it was only interoperable with itself (i.e., write once, run only on Google). Android killed Java interoperability, and now Google argues that killing interoperability is good for interoperability?

Those facts are not in dispute. The only issue in dispute is Google's assertion that its actions were all "fair." On this point, the federal circuit court clearly analyzed and methodically decided against Google's fair-use defense. This makes sense because, under no interpretation of fair use, may you copy a competitor's software code and turn around and compete against that competitor in the marketplace. Hard stop... There is no matter of law in question, nor is there a conflict among circuit courts. Google was caught killing interoperability and is now trying to concoct a new "we are too important" legal defense.

Reuters reports that this week the Supreme Court asked the White House "to offer its views on whether it should hear Google's bid to end Oracle's copyright infringement lawsuit."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Oracle Exec Mocks Google Arguments About Java's APIs

Comments Filter:
  • Fuck em (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 04, 2019 @03:57PM (#58539144)

    Rules motherfuckers. You cannot copyright a language, a language is the way we speak and it's just as much cultural as it is technological. To patent and lock down Java will do one thing...spur the creation of a new language. Oracle is literally killing itself fighting this moronic fight.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Rules motherfuckers. You cannot copyright a language, a language is the way we speak and it's just as much cultural as it is technological. To patent and lock down Java will do one thing...spur the creation of a new language. Oracle is literally killing itself fighting this moronic fight.

      Finally someone who gets at the issue! Java based Oracle interfaces that are sold or leased to their customers are not what is in question here. Using the java api to create a unique interface whether or not is capable of compiling into bit code is what we are forgetting.

      Google created a competing java language compiler and Oracle started running scared. Just because you can run code created with the java language in a different jit than the ones distributed from Oracle does not mean that Google ripped off

    • Wounding Java at least: A data point, see https://eclipse-foundation.blo... [eclipse-foundation.blog] which says Eclipse and Oracle have agreed that the javax package namespace cannot be evolved by the Jakarta EE community.
  • Google warns of a risk to innovation

    Yeah, at this point those words mean fuck all. Please tell the lawyers and lobbyists to find a scare phrase that isn't so stale.

    • Re:innovation (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 04, 2019 @04:08PM (#58539200)

      Google warns of a risk to innovation

      Yeah, at this point those words mean fuck all. Please tell the lawyers and lobbyists to find a scare phrase that isn't so stale.

      Not being able to reimplement a publicly available API is pretty much the equivalent of being able to hold hostage everyone that uses the API forever. Either shift everything to a new API or pay up, and keep paying up. Since its now a clearly conservative court, thanks to among other things, people who say their vote doesn't matter, it is quite possible they will rule for Oracle. Personally, I have nothing against java. It's a fine programming language, but C# is probably better these days and is becoming more cross platform all the time. I'd seriously consider porting something before I gave Oracle money. Microsoft is less evil than oracle these days, by a fair amount.

      • I'd have no problem developing apps in c# instead of Java. I'd imagine that a company like Google could successfully pull off something like a transition from Java to .NET, but I suppose they'd be more likely to choose Go or Dart or something.

  • Oracle is the post-child of abject failure to all things innovation. Their loss of industry leadership, and much less technology innovation, is in plain view by their team making such outlandish remarks about things like trying to redefine what is interoperability! (Hint: "write once, run everywhere" is NOT interoperability... it's portability.)

    The fundamental questions Google is asking of the Supreme Court is a constitutional matter that has ramifications worldwide and directly impacts the rights to a
    • Oracle couldn't give a fuck about the health of the industry. Their only goal is to act as the ultimate rent seekers in the IT industry. And they realised a huge amount of enterprise horse shit is written in Java, and they want rent payments for that. Thats the goal. If they can whack google for royalties, they can then take down the open source Java implementations, and if they succeed in that there will be *millions* of companies who are now beholden to Oracles rent seeking.

      Its a parasitic revenue scheme,

      • by mfearby ( 1653 )

        That might be Oracle's short to mid-term goal, but in the long term, nobody will touch Java for new developments, and the rent they can collect from a technology synonymous with the plague will be very small indeed. They'll then be left trying to gouge customers with database license audits (for those companies still dumb enough to choose Oracle to store their data, that is).

  • by Hognoxious ( 631665 ) on Saturday May 04, 2019 @04:05PM (#58539184) Homepage Journal

    Don't know if it's ad hominem or tu quoque (or both) but it's a bit rich coming from someone at Orible.

  • by bill_mcgonigle ( 4333 ) * on Saturday May 04, 2019 @04:17PM (#58539234) Homepage Journal

    It is settled in law and in economics that the opposite is true.

    Hey, Oracle mouthpiece - there are transcripts here in 30 languages:

    https://www.ted.com/talks/joha... [ted.com]

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 04, 2019 @04:17PM (#58539236)

    That's just a pure lie. Left or right wing, there isn't a single economic model suggesting IP is good for the economy. The so called "incentive argument" was repeatedly shown false under game theory as well as statistics analysis.

    Law wise, bull. Legal scholars don't support IP as a core right. They explicitly argue it's a regulative measure that should be weighed for its pros and cons on behalf of society rather than the individual

    IP is just a way to incentivize progress and cultures. If it fails to do so it doesn't deserve the protection of society.

    • For "intellectual property protection", read "government-enforced monopoly". Economists are in fair agreement that such those should be only be used if there is no other option.

      Software is different. It's so different that the old IP rules are a very poor fit. No other thing that I'm aware of is "protected" by copyright, patent, and trade secret at the same time.

  • by tricorn ( 199664 ) <sep@shout.net> on Saturday May 04, 2019 @04:30PM (#58539286) Journal

    Java defined the era of interoperability with its "write once, run everywhere" architecture. It was Google that copied Java, built Android around it, and altered it so it was only interoperable with itself (i.e., write once, run only on Google). Android killed Java interoperability, and now Google argues that killing interoperability is good for interoperability?

    Ironic, since the Android API covers more of the Java SE API than the Java ME API that Sun/Oracle wanted Google to use.

    They refused to license Java SE to Google, which is the primary reason they wrote their own (including a portion of the Java API, copied from the Harmony version under the terms of the Apache license).

    The only part of Oracle's code they were found to have infringed is the declarations, including the names of classes and method signatures.

    • The only part of Oracle's code they were found to have infringed is the declarations, including the names of classes and method signatures.
      Erm, nope.
      As this is not an "infringement".

      • by tricorn ( 199664 )

        Yes, they did copy rangeCheck, inadvertently, which was so inconsequential that the damages were $0.

        They also disassembled some "security files", but that wasn't anything that ended up in the Android API.

        What other code do you claim they were found to have copied other than the declarations?

  • by Required Snark ( 1702878 ) on Saturday May 04, 2019 @04:36PM (#58539306)
    Here's what really happens with these kind of IP cases:

    Intel quits 5G modem business hours after Apple settles with Qualcomm [arstechnica.com]

    Intel says it is canceling a line of smartphone 5G chips that had been slated for 2020 launches. The announcement comes on the same day Apple announced a wide-ranging settlement with Qualcomm over patent issues.

    Qualcomm has long been a dominant player in the wireless chip business for smartphones. Apple worries about becoming too dependent on a single supplier. So in recent years, Apple has encouraged Intel to expand its wireless chip offerings and offered Intel a significant share of its business for 4G chips in the iPhone.

    So Oracle's defense of IP is just a fig leaf over their real motivation: monopolistic greed. Patents no longer serve innovation, they are a tool for dominant players to own markets and generate guaranteed profit. Given the current ridiculous length of patent protection, that means market control last so long that competition is not economically viable.

    Patent portfolios by Big Tech are like having a private army. They are deployed to thwart the opposition and short circuit competition. It's not about having a better product or a better business model, it's about using legal roadblocks to stop your enemy. Given how easy it is to get meaningless patents, they are relatively cheep.

    That's why business boast about the size of their portfolios. It's a warning: I can screw you up unless you play ball with me.

    • So Oracle's defense of IP is just a fig leaf over their real motivation: monopolistic greed

      Oracle never hides their greed. If you don't see it, it's because you aren't looking.

  • If APIs are subject to copyright then doesn't that mean if you use the same API as something that originally GPL (e.g. Linux kernel syscalls) that it would make your entire project GPL?

    I suppose Microsoft is leaning in favor of interoperability in this case... unless they are looking to GPL their Linux subsystem.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      For linux specific system calls you have a point, but most of Linux is a copy of Unix. Does that mean the opengroup controls all operating systems copying a posix like interface?

      Does solaris reimplement any linux system calls? oracle might be opening up an attack against them. I know solaris has some bsd system calls. Can the original authors go after oracle? Solaris is toast.

      Has oracle shipped a copy of samba in anything?

      Their database products likely copied earlier products also. Can the current owne

  • by Orgasmatron ( 8103 ) on Saturday May 04, 2019 @07:06PM (#58539714)

    SCOTUS is asking the White House if they should take Google's case?

    In that case, it looks like the animosity [imgs.fyi] they've been cultivating is about to turn around and bite them on the ass.

  • Absurd (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I read the transcripts from the original trial that Oracle lost. Oracle is upset about some header files. Google didn't steal actual code. They were careful never to use any Java VM code when they designed Dalvik. All they did was arrange their own API to be compatible with Sun Microsystem's Java, which by the way at the time Sun was all for. Sun was excited to get anyone interested in their language and didn't mind. It wasn't until Oracle bought them out they decided to copyright troll Google because they

  • Dear Google,

    Create your own language. Don't bastardize Java, violate the terms and the community, then bitch about it.

    • No idea what you are talking about.
      Googles Java is the same as any other.

      The only differences are:
      * additional APIs for the UI
      * additional APIs for the phone functions
      * additional APIs for the interaction of Apps on your phone

      You basically can run every Java App on an Android phone by simply packaging it in Dalvik format, unless it uses AWT or Swing etc. (but there are Swing ports for Android (https://github.com/javalovercn/j2se_for_android) and JavaFX (https://bitbucket.org/javafxports/android/downloads/)

      • A federal court disagreed with you and many Android developers also do. Google basically tried to rip off Java, not work with it. Nothing they did was collaborative and everything they did was along the lines of trying to hijack it.

        I am not a hard-core Android developer but know that many who are find it very distasteful. Fortunately there is now Kotlin. Kotlin is closer to where Google should have started.

  • If Oracle wins (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Sunday May 05, 2019 @01:30AM (#58540590)
    Won't they have to pay a mint to Berkeley and Motorola? Because those are the companies whose instruction sets the SPARC processors are based on [wikipedia.org]. Likewise, for Oracle for x86, they'd owe Intel and AMD for using the x86 and AMD64 instruction sets (writing code using those instructions) without permission. And since Oracle is basing their argument on copyright (which is life + 70 years), all of these instruction sets are still under copyright despite originating in the 1980s or earlier.

    Oracle's short-sighted thinking in this Google case seems like it may be the setup for the most epic self-petard-hoisting in computing history.
    • You are so naive that it's almost cute. Very unusual in the pit of mud, puke and blood we of the Slashdot clan call home.

      Your question assumes that the case was decided on facts. That's not even in the right part of the universe. It was decided by lawyers and judges in a court of law: a completely fact free region of existence.

      The other potential players you bring up would be laughed out of the courtroom because they could not afford the legal expenses. This level civil action is closer to Musk starting S

      • The other potential players you bring up would be laughed out of the courtroom because they could not afford the legal expenses.

        Intel can't afford legal expenses? What about IBM, where SQL was invented? Can they?

    • Its ironic though that Oracle would herald the end of the computer age.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Let's go through this:

    > It was Google that copied Java, built Android around it, and altered it so it was only interoperable with itself (i.e., write once, run only on Google).

    This isn't really true to begin with. It's possible to write a portable Java program that will run on Android.

    There are some additional APIs that were added for Android and if you use them then your program only runs on systems that implement those APIs. So then what allows interoperability? The ability for other systems to impleme

  • ... must surely not be bitten. Famous TV add quote in Dutch: Wij van Wc-eend adviseren Wc-eend. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
  • There was a time in the 1980's where IBM crushed some competitors rightly so for using their copyrighted BIOS. These vendors actually just copied the code. However, two companies successfully warded off IBM. They were Compaq and Phoenix Technologies. You can watch "Silicon Cowboy's" on YouTube where Rod Canion and others involved directly in the process talk about it.
  • To "don't be evil"?

  • Looks like the Oracle execs have been drinking the old SUN Kool aid. More like write once debug and make new versions everywhere. Then if Java is updated - your app is *BROKEN*.

    I've seen it so often. From backup software to HP's server automation (Now microfocus, they actually upgraded from Java to Python) to all kinds of other stuff.

    Java is a miserable little language. When I went to learn it a couple of decades ago I knew it sucked when not even the examples in the beginners book would work. Perl code I w

    • LOLZ, you're confused, the breaking of java api is relatively recent thing.

      if your code didn't work 20 years ago it was because you had problems or misconceptions, there was no problem with language. I speak as java developer from late 90s, employer inherited a former oracle exec.

      Java is huge, massive enterprise used mature libraries. Pythion and its libraries are a joke and are what are "little" in comparison, for the realm of business use.

      I hate it because it is warmed over C++, and yes recently minor v

      • by ebvwfbw ( 864834 )

        I really think you're forgetting. I know they changed stuff from 1995. Like I said examples from the book didn't work. Some did, most didn't. The Server Automation and even Net Backup shows the API has been broken over and over again for the past 15 years. Not me, documented by Netbackup, which is also owned by Oracle when they bought out SUN and their massive incredible tape library robots. Those things still run Solaris.

        I know java is huge. I know it has a lot of capabilities. I also know about the proble

        • yes java makes apps that can be resource pigs, I still have the misfortune of working with websphere.

          the major version changes back in teh day did change API but that's an expected thing different problem. now oracle breaks it with tiny version bumps

          I wouldn't dis COBOL, the core of our ERP system at work is written in COBOL and is a product decades old from the 70s that is still evolving and has modern features of web/mobile/email workflow... And a lot of those python numerical packages have FORTRAN co

          • by ebvwfbw ( 864834 )

            Websphere. Could be worse. I've seen people get rid of Websphere for Siebel. Maybe it's better now that Oracle owns it. Siebel was a real pos.

            I think someone has you snowed. Nobody is using cobol for new web stuff or anything else unless there is no alternative. I'm still getting gigs to upgrade people off of it to Linux. Pays well and it's part time. Even with my abilities I could write a handler for a web application in cobol. I can't think of a good reason to do that. In fact, it would seem to be the ma

            • So you're not in the realm of scientific computation. Many of the worlds best numerical libraries are written in FORTRAN, and so many python systems call them. Because they are far too huge to reimplement without years of fixing subtle bugs that would emerge. For example, Sagemath, numpy, scipy all are written in python... and call FORTRAN libraries for some functions. Sure you could choose to run numpy with it's own dog slow pure python for matrices but for serious large models the FORTRAN librarie

  • Things like this keep me inching away from the idea of "intellectual property" as a Good Thing. Especially for things like APIs.

    The traditional arguments made some sense in the past. To me, when I was young. And in the 19th century. (Not the same time, quite.) For books and sheet music and piano rolls and physical inventions.

    But now that we have computer software and digital media for transmission and storage of entertainment. And more to the point, we're living on Planet of the Lawyers. So I'm gro

  • "under no interpretation of fair use, may you copy a competitor's software code and turn around and compete against that competitor in the marketplace."

    Where do they compete? Oracle doesn't make phones, search engines, sell ads or have a YouTube. What makes them competitors?

    • Where do they compete? Oracle doesn't make phones, search engines, sell ads or have a YouTube. What makes them competitors?

      Oracle is living in their own little fantasy world where their Java for phones product actually got adopted by... anybody. The fact that you don't know such a thing even existed tells you how badly it failed in the marketplace.

      Now Oracle thinks they can force the entire market to be handed over to them on a silver platter. If the appeals court ruling stands, they were correct. And software as an industry is ended. There are hundreds of millions of APIs, and tens of millions of reimplementations, and bas

"Imitation is the sincerest form of television." -- The New Mighty Mouse

Working...