Setting aside the file cabinets and the whiteboard coding and the hamburgers and the GNU, there's something weird about these proceedings
-
-
But like
@danielnazer says, some does go to factor 2 (nature of the work). Still, much of it really focuses on copyrightability issues -
This isn't supposed to be a trial about copyrightability but the jury has got to be wondering about it at this point.
-
And especially, especially since Oracle keeps bringing up the nonsensical comparisons to literature and so forth
-
Like at some point, you have think, yeah, Google's use of APIs isn't painting or literature, but neither are the APIs to begin with?
-
It's almost like Google's case is "It's fair use because they didn't think APIs were copyrightable"
-
and Oracle's is "It's not fair use because they DID KNOW the APIs were copyrightable!"
-
This. Is. Madness.
- 6 réponses de plus
Nouvelle conversation -
-
-
oracle did stress that android's usage was for profit and that while a small part of the work has big commercial impact
Merci. Twitter en tiendra compte pour améliorer votre fil. SupprimerSupprimer
-
-
-
Good faith and fair dealing matter, and those are affected by perceptions of how significant/creative the infringed work is
Merci. Twitter en tiendra compte pour améliorer votre fil. SupprimerSupprimer
-
-
-
This is why the preliminary jury instruction that fair use analysis is not limited to the four factors is key.
Merci. Twitter en tiendra compte pour améliorer votre fil. SupprimerSupprimer
-
-
-
Couldn't it be straight tactics to establish something to fight over AT ALL, because bringing in fair use would hamper that...?
Merci. Twitter en tiendra compte pour améliorer votre fil. SupprimerSupprimer
-
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.