@Maelstorm ... Re: Far reaching repercussions...
Clearly there is more to this case than what is being written in the article.
But lets clear some misconceptions on your part.
"Interoperability is at the heart of the technology industry. "
Where is there interoperability between Java and Google's virtual machine?
The point is that Google wrote their version of a JVM as a way to skirt Sun's Licensing Terms.
(This is actually a fact that was brought up during the case.)
The key for Google was to create a virtual machine similar to Java so that it would be adopted by developers. One of Oracle's arguments is that this isn't interoperability but Intellectual Property theft.
The other example you raised.... OpenOffice/LibreOffice's ability to read and write Microsoft Office documents.
This isn't an API issue. The document is written to a published specification. As is UEFI. (Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI) is a specification for a software program that connects a computer's firmware to its operating system (OS). ) [Google it]
Interoperability by following a published Specification is not illegal nor a violation of copyright laws.
And that's key. Google did not start their design from scratch.
To be clear, I don't want to sound like I am taking sides. However... Oracle's arguments do have merit and there is a lot of misconceptions on the part of everyone. The odds are in Oracle's favor. For google to win, they have to first get SCOTUS to hear the case. They may decide not to hear it. Then if they do decide to hear it, Google has to win. Straight odds? Oracle 75%, Google 25%
With 8.8 Billion and growing on the line? I'd spend a million or two on lawyers to get it in front of SCOTUS too.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
