Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/threads/is-oracle-trying-to-redefine-the-meaning-of-open-source-software.7839/
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2021770
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

Is Oracle trying to redefine the meaning of open source software?

These days I'm cautious about what I read in Seeking Alpha, but this blog, if reasonable, points to a serious concern. Oracle is suing Google over use of Java APIs. Java is open-source so in any reasonable interpretation, using the APIs should not seem like a problem. But apparently Oracle got an earlier ruling that the APIs are proprietary, seeming to further cement a wide-held view that our courts are clueless about technology in general and about our expectations of open-source in particular. The blogger points out that if Oracle were to succeed in this case, everyone who has used open-source APIs in anything will be exposed.

What will come out of this? Google might take it to the Supreme Court, Java may become radioactive (law of unintended consequences, take note Oracle), a chill over open-source in general, who knows.

The $9 Billion Loss To Oracle Would Be Just The Start Of Software's Pain - Alphabet Inc. (NASDAQ:GOOG) | Seeking Alpha
 
Right now watching the live tweets, the jury can't even OPEN the source code example - folder leads into folder leads into folder ....
 
Java is open-source so in any reasonable interpretation, using the APIs should not seem like a problem.

When Android was developed JAVA from Sun was not open source. The case is not about open source either. Know you have OpenJDK under GPL that is supported/tolerated by Oracle but due to the copyleft nature of the license it is not much use for Google.

But apparently Oracle got an earlier ruling that the APIs are proprietary, seeming to further cement a wide-held view that our courts are clueless about technology in general and about our expectations of open-source in particular.

Actually the previous ruling was that APIs are copyrightable. The question that is now being decided is if that also means you can make them proprietary or people may use them anyway under 'fair use' provisions.
 
Thanks Staf - good to know. But the question of fair use around APIs seems problematic. Open source without open access to APIs isn't very useful (you can't optimize to underlying hardware for example). I have no particular problem with the courts finding either way against Google - they can afford it. But if the message is that the same standard can be applied to anyone using Java along with APIs or any other nominally open-source with corresponding APIs, I for one will avoid Java like the plague.
 
Big sigh of relief from anyone wondering if their use of open-source fell with "fair-use"

Unfortunately in the first case, the first trial also said APIs were not copyrightable but it was changed during appeal...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh well.. But then there's this from Seeking Alpha suggesting even if Oracle prevails in appeal, it won't be quite the win they were hoping for..

Google wins Android patent battle against Oracle - Oracle (NYSE:ORCL) had been seeking $9B in damages over Google's (GOOG, GOOGL) use of Java APIs in Android. A California federal jury, granting the latest in a long string of wins for defendants in high-profile infringement suits, ruled Google's Java usage fell under fair use. Not surprisingly, Oracle plans to take the case to a federal appeals court (the CAFC). The court's recent patent verdicts have been very mixed, with more adverse rulings against perceived patent trolls than before. Even if Oracle gets a favorable appeal, the odds of the company ever getting anything close to $9B from Google appear quite low.
 
Back
Top