ChairmanZach

7 ms·

1.
by ChairmanZach 11y ago
Why should they? Microsoft has nothing to gain from doing so and reverse engineering interfaces or implementing them under fair use is already allowed. Wine is also something done explicitly to create compatability, Google made sure Android
2.
by ChairmanZach 11y ago
Not only do APIs resemble the chapters and headings of a book, they aslo include the contract that the content under those headings have exactly the same behaviour. Google didn't just copy the "heading" java.lang.Math.max() t
3.
by ChairmanZach 11y ago
If they are done by copying someone elses work without permission then by copyright infringement. If done by implementing a standard or through a license etc. then no harm is done. Do you think that I should be allowed to steal the declarin
4.
by ChairmanZach 11y ago
Wine is a reverse engineering of the APIs, not a blatant copy. edit: Straight from Wikipedia: "Wine is predominantly written using black-box testing reverse-engineering, to avoid copyright issues.[4] [4] https://forum.winehq
5.
by ChairmanZach 11y ago
Yet Google claims that the implementing code should be protected by copyright. How is "return a > b ? a : b;" not a method of operation if "public static int Max(int a, int b)" is... If the implementation, CODE(!), is
6.
by ChairmanZach 11y ago
The .NET standard libraries are part of the CLI which is a part of ISO/IEC 23271:2012, a standard. I have no idea when it comes to the EC2 API. Should it be legal for me to copy all of the declaring code of my employers product and aft
7.
by ChairmanZach 11y ago
Finding non-shill opinions on this whole issue is quite hard. Once you check the facts of the case it's really quite open-and-shut in Oracle's favor.
8.
by ChairmanZach 11y ago
""[Google]'s Section 102(b) argument also suffers from a broader flaw." (this sentence transitions from the Administration's rejection of Google's suggestion that declaring code is inherently more functional an