Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
A judge with programming experience, maybe there is hope?
Jibz:
From The Economist via Hacker News:
"So long as the specific code used to implement a method is different," the judge wrote, "anyone is free under the Copyright Act to write his or her own code to carry out exactly the same function or specification of any methods used [to achieve work-alike functionality]," adding that "where there is only one way to express an idea or function, then everyone is free to do so and no one can monopolise that expression."
...
The full 41-page ruling makes for a riveting read. In part that is because the judge has, as he noted during in the trial, written programming code himself—and learned some of the Java language under consideration to test the claims Oracle's lawyers were making about the nature of work-alike functionality. What Oracle attempted to do, it appears, is apply principles of patents (which protect methods) to copyright (which protects specific creative instantiations).
--- End quote ---
It is great that we are finally starting to see some people who actually have a shred of experience with programming making decisions about software. I think many of the ridiculous decisions of the courts and patent offices reflect the total lack of understanding of what they are ruling about.
zridling:
Now if we could just get some politicians who respected the code!
wraith808:
Yet another reason why the judicial system sucks. You look at it from the positive - and it is. But from the negative, what would have happened if another judge had received the case. Courtrooms as fiefdoms... bah. I need not to get started on that particular rant.
TaoPhoenix:
Yeah, from what I read briefly, we got the correct result *this time*.
If it had gone the other way from what I gathered (correct me if I'm wrong) it would have had nasty effects.
Jibz:
http://gigaom.com/mobile/famous-judge-spikes-apple-google-case-calls-patent-system-dysfunctional/
In his remarkable ruling, U.S. Circuit Judge Richard Posner stated that there was no point in holding a trial because it was apparent that neither side could show they had been harmed by the other’s patent infringement. He said he was inclined to dismiss the case with prejudice — meaning the parties can’t come back to fight over the same patents — and that he would enter a more formal opinion confirming this next week.
--- End quote ---
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version