[GTALUG] Google wins over Oracle in Java API copyright suit

[Russell Reiter]

On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 5:44 PM D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk <talk at gtalug.org>
wrote:

> | To: D. Hugh Redelmeier <hugh at mimosa.com>, GTALUG Talk <talk at gtalug.org>
>
> | From: Russell Reiter via talk <talk at gtalug.org>
>
> | On Tuesday, 6 April 2021, D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk <talk at gtalug.org>
> | wrote:
>
> | Quite so. In Oracles case I believe the issues of patent were tossed
> right
> | away leaving only the issue of copyright
>
> I said so in the first message on this thread.
>

Copyright and patent are two sides of a double edged sword.


> But you brought up drugs, so off we go on a different tangent.
>

Well I previously brought up the government's position on sars and cipralex
manufacturing in the context of today's covid issues and intellectual
property. Sorry for confusing your issue.

However, drug synthesis is probably some of the earliest patent law on
record.


> | > There are a few tests for US Fair Use.  Do you think that
> | > "transformative" is the same as you meant by "adds value"?
> | >
> | > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformation_(law)>
> |
> | I believe the article indicates in this case and most likely for those
> | similar to it, the test is twofold. The issue of the facts is for the
> jury
> | to decide, the issue of law is for the judge.
>
> There are issues of fact and issues of law.  That is a potential in any
> legal case.
>

Well in some legal cases, human rights for example, issues are decided by a
single party; the Tribunal members hearing the facts and the law are on
their own without a jury of peers. Of course the precedents set are binding
only on the tribunal. However, judicial review is the only path upward from
there.


>
> In tests for US fair use, there are four major factors, with sub-parts
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#U.S._fair_use_factors>
>
>
> | I believe that for educational purposes a school may copy the entire text
> | of a play for the drama department, which the students may then use for
> | their schools production.
>
> I don't think that that is the case.  I think that it is wishful
> thinking.
> But I might be wrong.
>
> In Canada, there is special fund paid to copyright holders as compensation
> for certain kinds of educational use.  I think that it is organized by
> Access Copyright (but I could be confused)
> <https://www.accesscopyright.ca/>
>

I may be wrong. I was a member of an amature theatre group, we photocopied
the stuff anyway. I think it was one of the teachers in that heritage group
who put it that way to me, as a cultural right.

I'm not sure that Brendan Behan would object to the Toronto Irish Players
copying the script of Borstal Boy to introduce it to the citizens of
Toronto, but I might be wrong about that as well.

>
> | This might be why this case took ten years to settle. There were quite a
> | number of equitable factors to be considered.
>
> Appeal after appeal and then a retrial and more appeals seems a more
> likely reason for delay.
>

Well that is how the legal system works, argument, decision; argue the
decision in appeal according to a reasonable/correct standard of whether
the decision was in error in fact or in law or both and finally; heard at
the supreme court where all rights to change the decision are stopped. The
final estoppel of law; it is ratified, codified and absolute.

>
> | There is the concept in natural law that just because you have an idea,
> | that doesn't necessarily make it only your own.
>
> "Intellectual Property" is an invention of mankind.  It is not natural
> law.
>

Sorry I mis-stated I meant to say natural justice.

> ---
> Post to this mailing list talk at gtalug.org
> Unsubscribe from this mailing list
> https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
>


-- 
Russell
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gtalug.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20210406/79c8fa68/attachment.html>