
Trump administration backs Oracle in Google fight - dsil
https://www.axios.com/trump-administration-backs-oracle-in-google-fight-b23f0583-2dad-457a-be78-69c2e2e993cd.html
======
nhebb
Did anyone here bother to check the bio's of the officials listed on the
amicus brief? If so, you'd discover that the many (maybe most, I didn't count)
were holdovers from previous administrations. But, conspiracy theories are
fun, I guess.

Given the bipartisan history of the lawyers for the Copyright Office and the
DOJ, one possibility is that they are basing the amicus on their
interpretation of the Copyright Act and related legal precedents. My
preference would be that public interface part of API's would be public
domain. But that's a preference, not a legal opinion.

~~~
thu2111
Your last sentence nails it.

The problem with this case is that the legally correct thing is that Oracle
wins. The most desirable practical outcome is that they lose.

Copyright protects creative works. It's not clear why an API wouldn't be a
creative work. Oracle's lawyers argue that it is a creative work, because
different people can come up with very different designs to solve the same
problem, that API design is a skilled and creative process. They're right.

The tech industry has always been in an unstable situation with respect to
this consensual interpretation that APIs are facts and not creative works.
That's convenient for many people, but tricky to legally support. The correct
solution to this problem is an exemption in copyright law for APIs. Given no
such exemption exists, why should Oracle not win this case? The judges are
meant to rule on law as it is, not what it should be.

------
rvz
This is the absolute reason why Dart, Flutter and Fuchsia exist. You can now
imagine that if a loss from Google in this lawsuit were to happen, it would
mean royalties in the billions for Oracle which Google won't pay for, or at
least for a long time for Android.

So an option is to migrate the Android ecosystem onto Fuchsia to rid of the
Oracle royalty fees and own the ecosystem without anyone else looking to sue
you for the tech you're using if you created it.

~~~
bitL
How is Fuchsia relevant to Java API Oracle is chasing them for? Google's back
up plan is Kotlin anyway; they can push new version of API that completely
severs backward compatibility while providing some library for "legacy app API
translation".

~~~
jedieaston
I thought that Kotlin required the JVM to run?

~~~
gnulinux
JVM is fair game; this case is about Java SDK interface.

------
vikingcaffiene
IMO there's two ways to read this: either A) this is a baldly transparent
attempt to "own the libs" and punish a company that the administration sees as
a threat or B) they are too incompetent to understand the technical nuances of
the case and are essentially morons. Maybe both? This administration can't be
thrown out on their collective asses fast enough...

~~~
0xff00ffee
Both. 50 years of people cynically saying "all politicians are crooks". And
now we have legitimate sleazeballs running the country and nobody believes it.

On the one hand, Google is huge and needs competition. On the other hand: not
this way. Antitrust and monopoly laws exist for a reason, but if you look at
telephones in the 80's and microsoft & intel in the 90's, better lawyers get
you around that.

We need trustbusters with teeth. Especially for tech. I wish the EFF was 100x
larger.

~~~
scarface74
The government _caused_ the phone monopoly and the slap on the risk had
nothing to do with Microsoft's missteps when it came to the internet and later
mobile. Microsoft still has the same dominance on the desktop that they had
during the 90's.

~~~
criddell
The action in the 90's wasn't to break up their desktop dominance, it was to
prevent them using that power to dominating the internet too.

~~~
scarface74
That might have been their goal, but do you really think that it had anything
to do with the rise of Google, Facebook, Amazon and the resurgence of Apple?

What had more effect on IE being toppled by Chrome, the government or the most
popular website advertising it on their front page and bundling it with third
party downloads?

~~~
dhimes
If Microsoft had built adblockers into IE from the beginning there would be no
Google. But that was a strategic error, not due to law. And people were
definitely on the Google bandwagon in part because of Microsoft. The "do no
evil" motto was a direct shot at MS, and everybody felt relief.

~~~
scarface74
Only the geeks cared about the “do no evil”.

~~~
dhimes
Fair point.

------
seren
I did not follow every step, but assuming Oracle win this, will it also apply
to Amazon proposing DocumentDB with the same API that MongoDB ?

~~~
CobrastanJorji
Who even knows? If APIs are copyrighted and implementing them is a crime, Tim
Berners-Lee might end up a billionaire.

~~~
kllrnohj
See also everyone (including Oracle) that copied Perl 5's regular expression
API, and typically even say that straight in their own documentation (again,
including Java's).

~~~
onlyrealcuzzo
How does Java not copy much of C's API / syntax and type system -- which I'm
sure is mostly copied from something else.

It's turtles all the way down.

------
chubot
Question: if this lawsuit goes in Oracle's favor, what does that mean for
WINE? Isn't that the same issue? WINE provides compatible Windows APIs.

Also SMB? Although I think that's done at the protocol layer and not the C API
layer (?)

------
tus88
> The administration found Google's policy arguments are "unpersuasive" and
> argued software code is copyrightable.

What? Wasn't it about APIs not code?

~~~
ViViDboarder
That was part of it. This article is light on details, but there was one part
of the codebase that was copied verbatim. It was the RangeCheck function.
Google argued that the function in question was not copywritable, and judge
Alsup agreed (after learning how to write code). [1]

It’s unclear to me if the administration only sides with Oracle on this count,
or also on reimplementation of APIs, which would have sweeping impacts.

[1] [https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/19/16503076/oracle-vs-
googl...](https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/19/16503076/oracle-vs-google-judge-
william-alsup-interview-waymo-uber)

~~~
kickopotomus
Honestly, I feel that it would almost be worse if the Court ruled in Oracle's
favor on the ability to copyright intuitively obvious functions. There are
only so may ways to write `return x >= a && x <= b;` that aren't unnecessarily
obtuse and contrived. It's honestly tantamount to being able to copyright math
itself.

~~~
tetha
I know this is inappropriate..

but to me, it sounds like a fascinating and hilarious dystopian visions...
there'd be entire legal teams dedicated to find, and claim and defend the
corporate specific ways to implement.. a range check (NO! Don't put a space
there! Oh dear!). Or, if a number is even. And an eternal cultural feud
between the "is-even"-clan and the "is-odd"-triad.

Once we include mercenaries hired to steal certificates about a specific is-
odd implementation, we're in a really weird kind of cyberpunk or shadow run.

Also, don't count the number of paragraphs in this comment and think about
them. Don't! Or else!

------
mint2
Is this in anyway tied to Ellison recently hosting a trump fund raiser?

~~~
jVinc
Politically correct answer: No, they are completely independent just like all
other fundraising activities.

Reality: Yes, Oracle is openly bribing the president to get the administration
to push their agenda.

------
cletus
Of course they do. Some might point to Larry Ellison being a major supporter
[1] but I think the real motivation is this plays into the narrative that
Google is somehow biased against conservatives.

What's interesting about this is Google made two huge mistakes here:

1\. According to Google, Sun was fine with their use of Java. If so, why not
just put it in writing and get a license? This might've only cost $10 million
at the time. Maybe not even that. Even if it was $100 million, it sure looks
cheap now;

Remember, Microsoft originally paid for a Java license for IE [2]. And one
issue with the Sun-Microsoft lawsuit was that Sun argued forking Java was a
breach of contract. Surely this establishes that even if Sun were fine with
Android they could try and enforce their IP rights through litigation. So why
not enshrine this in a license?

2\. Google declined to bid on Sun. I remember when this went down and it
seemed risky to let Oracle control Java given how invested Google was in Java
at that point. And it should've been clear that Oracle's interest was to
leverage Sun's IP to get a slice of Android. Hubris is the only thing I can
think of that justified letting this happen.

[1]: [https://www.marketwatch.com/story/oracle-employees-call-
on-l...](https://www.marketwatch.com/story/oracle-employees-call-on-larry-
ellison-to-cancel-trump-fundraiser-2020-02-18)

[2]: [https://www.cnet.com/news/sun-seeks-35-million-in-java-
suit/](https://www.cnet.com/news/sun-seeks-35-million-in-java-suit/)

~~~
bitL
Jonathan Schwartz was always complaining about Google using SUN's API; they
hoped Google would write them a nice fat check and be BFFs but Google decided
to be selfish and just used and replaced SUN's tech. I think combination of
ex-SUN's people mood and Oracle's lawyer-heavy structure couldn't have led to
a different outcome.

------
mips_avatar
I feel like in a normal presidential administration the support of the
president is great for companies. With this administration it's a liability.

~~~
ratsmack
Please define what a "normal presidential administration" looks like.

~~~
mips_avatar
One that has more bi-partisan buy in, and just generally less controversial.
Basically every administration in the last 50 years except for Nixon post-
watergate, and Trump.

------
quotemstr
Is there any doubt that this is some kind of score-settling? Republicans
_hate_ Google. I don't think people inside the SV bubble appreciate just how
intense this hatred has become. You know the seething, implacable anger, that
bile that comes up out of your stomach when you think of a politician you
don't like? A lot of republicans feel that way about Google.

This hatred doesn't come out of nowhere. Google's leaders could have chosen to
make the company neutral and tolerant. Instead, they bred a culture of
political zealotry from top to bottom. The partisan hatred that the company
engendered then leaked into the outside world. The inevitable result? Half of
the United States power structure sees Google as an irredeemably biased
political project masquerading as a tech company. Is it? Maybe not. But
whether this judgement is true _doesn 't matter_ \--- what matter is the
perception that the company allowed its internal activists to create. It was
an unforced error, and it's one that I think will become an infamous
cautionary tale in the coming decades.

Lesson to corporate leaders: don't encourage politics at work; don't encourage
a culture of demonizing a political faction in your home country that wins
about half the time; and especially don't hold a company-wide all hands
election after this faction wins the election and lament that "we lost".

~~~
djannzjkzxn
I’m really skeptical that Republicans know or care about politics in Google’s
work culture. I think the only big story to come out about it, the James
Damore one, mainly got discussed from a gender angle and most Republican
politicians would prefer if that conversation didn’t happen at all.

~~~
cloakandswagger
They're acutely aware of the power big tech holds and how politically
devastating it would be if Google, Facebook, et al started to regulate their
platforms in a politically biased way.

That's why the idea of regulating social media and search products as public
utilities arose, and why Facebook is currently walking on eggshells to appear
neutral and apolitical.

------
QUFB
For those commenting on the thread how Google hates Republicans, their PAC
donates equally to both parties (technically a bit more to Reps):

[https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00428623](https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00428623)

------
bayindirh
Wouldn't allowing weaponization of APIs via copyrights throw interoperability
out of the window?

If this is a part of "Making America Great Again (TM)" campaign, they may be
shooting them in the proverbial foot with a BFG9000 breaking down all
interoperability in _their own_ tech sector.

------
kyrra
WSJ had an interesting piece a week ago:
[https://www.wsj.com/articles/oracles-man-in-washington-
fans-...](https://www.wsj.com/articles/oracles-man-in-washington-fans-the-
flames-against-rival-tech-giants-11581615873)

TLDR: Oracle has a lobbyist (who was on Trump's transition team) that has
gotten the ear of the Whitehouse and been pushing against Amazon and Google.

~~~
paulmd
Google can still get Trump's endorsement, just write him a check and he'll
back Google instead.

Worked for a pardon, Paul Pogue's family just wrote a $200k check and voila,
he's pardoned.

The office of president has never been more transparently for sale (ahem,
"open for business") and there's absolutely no chance the Senate will perform
any accountability here. He could literally murder someone on 7th avenue and
there would be 51 votes against conviction.

Sad that it's come to this, but if it's $200k vs an industry-destroying
precedent getting set, well... google should suck it up and write the check.

------
floppiplopp
"The best democracy money can buy!" -Larry Ellison

[https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/02/20/oracle_trump_google...](https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/02/20/oracle_trump_google/)

------
jVinc
Bribe the president: Definitely not ok. What sort of backwards ass country
would allow that sort of thing?

Host fundraiser inviting a couple of your friends to all donate huge amounts
to the president: What on earth is the problem? That's completely fair game
and I don't see any issues at all.

It seems the US Democracy is morally bankrupt at this point.

------
jbritton
I so fear the law suits over every tiny interface. push, pop, insert, remove,
put, get, post, delete, open, close, read, write, send, recv, begin, end,
next, prev, find, filter, sort, groupby, start, stop, sqrt, log, exp. Synonyms
not allowed.

------
choward
> The Trump administration brief came Wednesday just as Oracle founder Larry
> Ellison opened a campaign fundraiser for President Donald Trump at his
> southern California estate. Tickets ran as much as $250,000, according to an
> invitation obtained by the Desert Sun.

Is this the same Trump that doesn't need anyone's money and isn't beholden to
anyone? (Sorry for using Breitbart as a reference).

[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2015/06/16/peak-trump-
i-d...](https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2015/06/16/peak-trump-i-dont-need-
anybodys-money/)

------
PHGamer
seems to me google should be brown nosing more if it wants a fighting chance.
else they will lose once trump is reelected.

------
RcouF1uZ4gsC
> At an earlier stage in litigation, the Obama administration took a similar
> position, urging the Supreme Court not to accept Google's appeal.

It seems the Trump administration position is not really all that different
than the previous administrations.

~~~
jrs235
So to reverse the Trump administration's support, everyone should just start
tweeting how Trump agrees with Obama and supports the Obama administration's
position on this issue...

~~~
zentiggr
Given how much space Twitter seems to occupy in Trump's head, maybe this is
the only possible channel of control... maybe lock his feed up in some sort of
info bubble just like politicians want to do to us.

~~~
sixothree
I would love to see his twitter browsing history. I'm genuinely curious how he
came to find some of the stuff he posts.

------
gdsdfe
Haha of course it is, the guy is organizing a fund raiser for Trump's campaign

------
AlleyTrotter
To be fair How much has Google contributed to the Trump campaign? Sick and
tired of media blaming everything on DJT.

~~~
DarknessFalls
Probably not as sick and tired as most people are of DJT.

------
bediger4000
Does the Trump administration understand what this kind of law will do to all
of tech?

~~~
ocdtrekkie
Oracle winning will not destroy the tech industry, bring innovation to it's
knees, or any other crazy apocalyptic concept people have.

It'll mean Google will pay a huge penalty for very willfully stealing Java
when they knew they were supposed to license it, and other companies will be a
little more explicit about getting licenses squared away. Reliance on open
source APIs and platforms will probably go up, and license compliance with
terms of GPL and the like will be taken more seriously.

~~~
cromwellian
Riiiight. Because no lawyers have ever smelled a new ambulance to chase
kicking off dozens of harassment suits when new precedents are handed down.
Oracle has already threatened OSS databases, Samba was once threatened by
Microsoft aggressively, and whose to say WINE and other OSS API
reimplementations won't be under legal threat the way Unix reimplementations
were.

Any precedent that establishes clean-room API reimplementations are subject to
copyright infringement is bad for everyone.

You're willing to risk throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

~~~
thu2111
Yes, that's possible.

But patents are already just as powerful, actually much more so. They cause a
lot of problems but haven't caused the tech industry to collapse in a MAD
Mexican standoff of lawsuits.

------
just_myles
Complete and utter madness. I think they're simply doing this to be
contrarian.

