(credit: Aurich Lawson)
Despite a final verdict, the recent Oracle v. Google trial leaves plenty of questions about the future of APIs, fair use, copyright, development, and more. While their views do not necessarily represent those of Ars Technica as a whole, our staffers wanted to take a look at the outcome and potential ramifications from both sides. Below, Joe Mullin says Google's win sends a powerful message against a familiar legal tactic. Elsewhere, Peter Bright argues that software is about to suffer. You can also find guest op-eds from professor Pamela Samuelson (pro-Google) and attorney Annette Hurst (pro-Oracle).
We may never know with certainty why the jury in Oracle v. Google decided in Google's favor, but I can make a pretty good guess.
Like the jury, I'm no expert. I've been reporting on technology law for years, but becoming an experienced journalist is really just mastering the fine art of non-expertise. I have a pretty good conceptual idea of what an API is, derived entirely from listening to more knowledgeable people talk about this case. But if you showed me a block of code, I couldn’t pick out the APIs or "declaring code" at issue.
Read 37 remaining paragraphs | Comments
No comments:
Post a Comment