oh, and this isn't them *claiming*—the Federal Circuit ruled that. Now it's just if Google's reimp was fair use
-
-
En réponse à @xor @sarahjeong
For the specific case of max()? Or is that an arbitrary example?
2 réponses 0 Retweet 3 j'aime -
En réponse à @matthew_d_green @sarahjeong
there are 37 disputed packages, which include java.lang.Math's max().
2 réponses 0 Retweet 4 j'aime -
En réponse à @xor @sarahjeong
I'm sure some are truly unique to Java, but I'd be amazed if most didn't predate the language in some similar form.
2 réponses 1 Retweet 7 j'aime -
Surely that would affect the fair use argument.
1 réponse 0 Retweet 5 j'aime -
En réponse à @matthew_d_green @sarahjeong
It should! Speaks to factor 2's "nature of the copyrighted work." still, fair use is a straaaange fit
2 réponses 0 Retweet 4 j'aime -
En réponse à @xor @sarahjeong
So at this point if a developer staggers in with irrefutable proof that Java stole the full APIs from his grandfather...
2 réponses 1 Retweet 7 j'aime -
... It would not be relevant to the case? Oracle's ownership of the IP has already been decided?
1 réponse 1 Retweet 3 j'aime -
En réponse à @matthew_d_green @xor
you know, maybe this is just because I woke up from this nap, but this has me stumped
2 réponses 0 Retweet 4 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong @matthew_d_green
I think G didn't even try to challenge O's ownership of the ©—just that © didn't exist, OR G's use was fair
2 réponses 1 Retweet 5 j'aime
is it... too late, do you think?
-
-
like, come on, this stuff is more relevant than all this stuff about spec licenses
0 réponse 1 Retweet 4 j'aimeMerci. 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.