

Oracle/Google jury finds Google infringed SSO but hangs on fair use - grellas
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120507122749740#Update_3

======
revelation
There have been enough comments on what this means, whats going to happen
next, etc. Something that is bothering me. Juries are meant to infuse some
common reasoning into the law. And still, you get decisions like this:

 _The rangeCheck method in TimSort.java and ComparableTimSort.Java YES,
infringing...._

~~~
thereallurch
From OpenJDK:

private static void rangeCheck(int arrayLen, int fromIndex, int toIndex) {

    
    
            if (fromIndex > toIndex)
    
                throw new IllegalArgumentException("fromIndex(" + fromIndex +
                           ") > toIndex(" + toIndex+")");
    
            if (fromIndex < 0)
                throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(fromIndex);
    
            if (toIndex > arrayLen)
                throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(toIndex);
    
        }
    

From Google:

private static void rangeCheck(int arrayLen, int fromIndex, int toIndex) {

    
    
            if (fromIndex > toIndex)
                throw new IllegalArgumentException("fromIndex(" + fromIndex +
                           ") > toIndex(" + toIndex+")");
    
            if (fromIndex < 0)
                throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(fromIndex);
    
            if (toIndex > arrayLen)
                throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(toIndex);
    
        }

}

Open and shut case. /s

~~~
gouranga
To be blatantly honest, that is exactly what I'd write. The implementation is
trivial and obvious therefore the probability of them being the same is high.

~~~
ars
That's not the legal measure. If in fact they were both written identically,
but independently there is no infringement. If it's totally obvious, but it
was copied then there is infringement.

The takeaway is write it yourself - don't copy it without permission, even if
it's so obvious. (And if it's so obvious then there really is hardly a reason
to even copy it in the first place.)

~~~
fulafel
So you're saying that if I copy "for (i = 0; i < 100; i++)" then it's
infringment, and there's no requirement of originality for copyright
protection?

~~~
cullen
Oh dear, my freshmen are in a heap of trouble.

------
tomx
what is "SSO" in this context?

~~~
dminor
Sequence, Structure, and Organization. Oracle is making the case that even if
an individual method in the API isn't subject to copyright, collectively the
are because of SSO.

