Re: [License-discuss] Copyright on APIs

Of course that isn't my opinion. Only reciprocal licenses that purport to restrict linking.  Larry Sent from my phone. Original message From: VanL Date: 7/8/19 1:48 PM (GMT-08:00) To: Lawrence Rosen , license-discuss@lists.opensource.org Subject: Re: [License-discuss] Copyrig

Re: [License-discuss] Copyright on APIs

Hi Larry, Just making sure I understand: On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 3:22 PM Lawrence Rosen wrote: > I again plead with OSI, regardless of what the Supreme Court does with the > Oracle v. Google case, that OSI never again approve an open source license* > that purports to impede in any way by copyr

Re: [License-discuss] Copyright on APIs

Pamela Chestek dixit: >Java and Android are not designed to work together. The purpose of the >copying was not for interoperability between Java and Android. Erm… no. Android is a runtime for the Java™ programming language, similar to how OpenJDK is, or J2ME. They run on different operating env

Re: [License-discuss] Copyright on APIs

Thanks Pam for each helpful clarification. Clearly I had lost track of all the appeals at some point as the case is not front page stuff anymore. About the interoperability part, I realize courts can and will set their own thresholds here. But it's unfortunate if those stray too far from a common

Re: [License-discuss] Copyright on APIs

Hi Pam, I want to credit you for being far more familiar than I am with the pleadings in the Oracle v. Google case between those two huge software vendors. You are a more competent attorney than I at such things. Perhaps, as you suggest, the Supreme Court will take a narrow view of the issue

Re: [License-discuss] Data portability as an obligation under an open source license

On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 2:13 PM Russell McOrmond wrote: The human beings that are software end users are the individuals and > companies that are running the software on their computers, not the users > of their service. [...] > Your conceptualisation of user control is very different than min

Re: [License-discuss] Data portability as an obligation under an open source license

On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 1:13 PM Russell McOrmond wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 3:29 PM Luis Villa wrote: > >> If 'software freedom' means 'freedom for software end users (sometimes >> known as human beings)', then >> > > If I hire a landscaping company, and that company happens to use Microso

Re: [License-discuss] Copyright on APIs

On 7/8/19 4:42 AM, Henrik Ingo wrote: > On Sun, Jul 7, 2019 at 5:36 PM Pamela Chestek > wrote: > > > On 7/7/2019 4:23 AM, Henrik Ingo wrote: >> While I haven't closely followed the details of Oracle vs Google, >> purely from a layman and business standp

Re: [License-discuss] Data portability as an obligation under an open source license

On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 5:37 PM Thorsten Glaser wrote: > My personal opinion (coming from the BSD camp): > ... IMHO the AGPL is beyond acceptable already. > I'm from the GPL camp (preference for reciprocal licensing), and I also believe the AGPL is beyond acceptable already. -- Russell McOr

Re: [License-discuss] Data portability as an obligation under an open source license

On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 3:29 PM Luis Villa wrote: > If 'software freedom' means 'freedom for software end users (sometimes > known as human beings)', then > If I hire a landscaping company, and that company happens to use Microsoft Office, then it should be obvious that I am not a party to any a

Re: [License-discuss] Copyright on APIs

Just like SCO. They claimed that their BPF software had been copied. Common IPR mistake number one! Carefully save all of the metadata _with_the_software_, not with your legal file cabinet which will go in a different direction from the software when your company is acquired or spins off a division

Re: [License-discuss] Copyright on APIs

On 7/7/19 12:08 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote: > > Hi Pam, > >   > > Pam Chestek wrote this on 6/30/2019: > > > The [Oracle v. Google] case is about whether it was lawful to copy > portions of software to enhance the ease of development of software > for an entirely different software ecosystem. > >  

Re: [License-discuss] Copyright on APIs

On 7/7/19 1:11 PM, Chris DiBona wrote: > >> If I remember correctly, Oracle did find early on one function >> implementation that had indeed been copy pasted from OpenJDK to >> Android. But this was so minor (and obvious) it is not part of >> the issues decided in higher courts. >>

Re: [License-discuss] Copyright on APIs

On Sun, Jul 7, 2019 at 5:36 PM Pamela Chestek wrote: > > On 7/7/2019 4:23 AM, Henrik Ingo wrote: > > While I haven't closely followed the details of Oracle vs Google, purely > from a layman and business standpoint it seems clear that Google did create > Android / Dalvik exactly to be interoperabl