Hi,

I'm following the trial between Oracle vs Google and wondered about the following... Judge Alsup told the jury to assume API's are copyrightable - something Alsup still has to determine later during trial. Now if he does rule that API's are copyrightable, how will this affect the Lazarus and Free Pascal projects? Both the latter projects copy Embarcadero's API's verbatim.

http://www.osnews.com/story/25918/Google_infringed_Java_copyrights_but_we_don_t_know_if_that_s_illegal http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/05/jury-rules-google-violated-copyright-law-google-moves-for-mistrial.ars

Well, not verbatim. There are differences.

Now, if he so judges, that would mean the end of the wine, samba and many other open or closed source projects.

I suspect that this would be taken to a higher court by the FSF and other organisations as Redhat, Linux.org.

They would all have to close shop after such a ruling.

In each case, we are not US-based; a ruling by a US judge does not affect us.

At worst it would mean FPC/Lazarus cannot be used in the US.

Michael.

On the other hand, apparently EU judges ruled that programming languages are NOT copyrightable... the extract of the ruling seems to indicate (to me) that that specifically includes APIs:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/eu-court-rules-programming-languages-not-copyrightable/76076

I think a lot more projects will have problems if APIs are deemed copyrightable and doubt any sane person would rule that... but we are talking about the legal system... ;)

Suppose it's wait and see...

Hello all,

relevant recent news is that EU court ruled that APIs and programming languages are not copyrightable:
http://developers.slashdot.org/story/12/05/02/229208/eu-court-rules-apis-programming-languages-not-copyrightable

So at least in EU it is totally legal.

Regards,
?ilvinas

Now, if he so judges, that would mean the end of the wine, samba and many other open or closed source projects.

Indeed, it will have one hell of a knock-on effect.

In each case, we are not US-based; a ruling by a US judge does not affect us. At worst it would mean FPC/Lazarus cannot be used in the US.

That's always good to know.

?ilvinas Ledas wrote

So at least in EU it is totally legal.

Thanks for the link, I'll read that article now.

Before anything else, I want to make it clear that I am critical of Google's business model, which amounts to "it's probably illegal, it might be in the common good, it's definitely to our advantage, let's do it". But I think a bit more clarity from Oracle as to what they're trying to achieve would be in order: are they trying to protect their intellectual property, or are they trying to force a precedent?

Although I think that people would argue that the unix API was based on work which has ended up in the public domain, and has been extended in ways that are obvious to anybody "skilled in the art".

Superficially, Oracle can't wreck Linux since they sell an implementation. However they also own Solaris, and since their high-end kit works better with Solaris than with Linux my own feeling is that they'd like more people to use it.

In each case, we are not US-based; a ruling by a US judge does not affect us. At worst it would mean FPC/Lazarus cannot be used in the US.

In the UK, it could potentially mean extradition without trial: we've got an extremely lopsided treaty which is now being implemented as the law, despite the fact that the USA has not ratified it.

In any event, don't plan to go to Florida for your next vacation.

At worst it would mean FPC/Lazarus cannot be used in the US.

Thinking about it further... I guess even if the judge rules that API's are copyrightable in the US, Embarcadero would have a hard time coming after the FPC project.... because the latest Delphi ships with and uses FPC for its iOS (ARM) support. So in a way Embarcadero is OK with FPC (excluding Lazarus).

It's not about Oracle wrecking everyone, but companies that originally developed some API wrecking those that reimplemented it. Especially the Wine or ReactOS projects are "good" candidates for this (as Samba and Mono cooperate more or less with Microsoft I don't see that much problems for them).

Regards,
Sven

US hosters may be disallowed to make such software available. US users may be disallowed to import and use such software.

I don't think that these consequences really are wanted ;-)

IMO the difference between copying source files and copying contained declarations should be respected. The EU applies copyright to source files, but not to the ideas, interfaces etc. behind some software (no software patents).

DoDi

Graeme Geldenhuys wrote

On 8 May 2012 09:45, wrote:>> At worst it would mean FPC/Lazarus cannot be used in the US. Thinking about it further... I guess even if the judge rules thatAPI's are copyrightable in the US, Embarcadero would have a hard timecoming after the FPC project.... because the latest Delphi ships withand uses FPC for its iOS (ARM) support. So in a way Embarcadero is OKwith FPC (excluding Lazarus).

Definitely not a safe conclusion. Embarcadero could argue that they owned the IP that FPC was implementing, and were using the FPC compiler whilst at the same time preparing a legal attack.

But if Google fight all the way to the USA Supreme Court and lose, it will constitute a precedent: whatever Oracle's intentions.

Never a safe assumption: a rootkit can hide itself in Flash, and in particular can hide itself in the "hidden" System Management Mode BIOS space (Phrack 65).

Now, if he so judges, that would mean the end of the wine, samba and many other open or closed source projects.

Why that?

Sic!

At worst it would mean FPC/Lazarus cannot be used in the US.

You remember the PGP case? When the use or export of software is restricted, other countries can claim the same for their software. The assumption, that terrorists are too stupid to write or let write good software for them, is stupid again.

In the last c't magazine I found an side-cut on the German "Bundestrojaner", a spy software developed for the secret service:

"Since the AV software is booted from a clean CD, and has full control over the machine, there is no disk space where a rootkit or other spyware could hide itself."

Millions of taxes, spent for the development of that software, are burnt by an simple update of already existing software (Linux and AV). <grumble>

DoDi

El 08/05/2012 10:02, ?ilvinas Ledas escribi?:

... so far.

There is a strong pressure on EU to sign ACTA.

In fact, many countries in EU have signed ACTA bilaterally

http://mashable.com/2012/01/27/22-eu-countries-ratify-acta-key-parliament-member-calls-it-a-charade/

It still must be ratified by EU parliament, but...

The game is, "We, Commission, will ask you, EU Parliament, to ratify it. If you don't, we will ask you again in a few months. If you don't, we will ask you again in a few months. If you don't, we will ask you again in a few months. If you don't, we will ask you again in a few months.....

2012/5/8 ?ilvinas Ledas :

if so, and SAS code "functionality" can't be protected by copyright, what about functionality of GPL'ed code (analogously R-project) ? it also can't be protected (if source code is visible) ?

best regards
tw

Hans grumbled on this in next line ;)

L.

Folllow the logic. This trial is about theft. It's not about the API. Having API files that include verbatim code issued by Oracle are issued under a pretense. That pretense is what binds users of Java code to the licencing of the API by Oracle.

Oracle is telling google that that it is UNACCEPTABLE for google to take creative ownership over Java. This problem goes far beyond copying of some API. Google as made and Oracle product - and Oracle is not happy.

FPC and it's core design have been around prior to Embarcadero's purchase of Delphi from Inprise. At the point of purchase Embarcadero was responsible for objecting to FPC
and they could have avoided said purchase.

Both FPC and Lazarus predate Embarcadero's Delphi. So any verbatim code copying would have to be relatively recent. Since Lazarus is cross platform, only Windows based widgets would be the source of ANY potential threat to ligation. So Lazarus worst case scenero is that only PART of the project could EVER be called into question.

If they ever had a problem with say the Windows widgets I suspect the community at large would defend this project tooth and nail and a suit against Lazarus or FPC would probably cost them BIGTIME in PR points.

Recent versions of Delphi come with some parts FPC or Lazarus, this fact alone says signals their acceptance of FPC and Lazarus.

IMO, it is Embarcadero that would be worred about the Free software foundation come after them for the use of code by Lazarus or FPC.

Lastly, API stands for Application Programming Interface. So in order to Interface with an API, both sides of the code MUST be identical. While this conversation started with API, I'm telling you this has nothing to do Lazarus or FPC.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20120508/038e867e/attachment.html>

Well, there is also a strong pressure not to sign ACTA. It was given as a sure fact that Poland would sign Acta this february, but .... then people started protesting in the streets non-stop. Even while it was -20 there were large protests and the government eventually gave up. They couldn't face their popularity falling and called off the signing just 1 day before the date or something like that. Ever since there was no more talk about it and pretty much no politician would say he is for ACTA now. Something similar could happen everywhere in Europe.

I don't agree with many of your standpoints/reasoning, but us in this list arguing about these things won't help much I think... let's first see what the judge over there says.

Also, as others have said, I think FPC/Lazarus wouldn't be the only ones with a sudden problem; ReactOS, Samba, Wine, Ghostscript, perhaps those Windows wireless card Linux driver writers (if you understand what I mean) may all be in the same boat.

Lastly, API stands for Application Programming Interface. So in order to Interface with an API, both sides of the code MUST be identical.

That's certainly true... although variable names could differ I suppose ;)

Andrew Brunner wrote

Oracle is telling google that that it is UNACCEPTABLE for google to take creative ownership over Java. ?This problem goes far beyond copying of some API. ?Google as made and Oracle product - and Oracle is not happy.

This applies exactly to FPC and Lazarus as far as I can see. Borland/Embarcadero created a product (eg: like Sun/Oracle did with Java), then came the community and made a new competing product - based on the API of Borland/Embarcadero (like Google did).

Recent versions of Delphi come with some parts FPC or Lazarus, this fact alone says signals their acceptance of FPC and Lazarus.

I may be wrong, but as far as I know Delphi XE2 only uses FPC for compiling ARM/iOS executables. Delphi XE2 doesn't use anything of Lazarus.

Lastly, API stands for Application Programming Interface. ?So in order to Interface with an API, both sides of the code MUST be identical.

FPC and Lazarus are not interfacing with Delphi, they are cloning Delphi functionality and API [with some minor tweaks of there own], and making a competing product. As far as I can see, this is exactly what Google did with Java - and Oracle is not happy with this. In a similar situation Microsoft tried this before [with Java] and Sun won the case there.

At the moment anyway, it seems that if you are a developer in Europe, you are still safe to use FPC and Lazarus (as ?ilvinas quoted link shows). But for anybody else, this is a bit worrisome. :-( I guess we will just have to wait and see what the judge decides.

I've never ran a check to see what is different in units. Delphi is Windows ONLY. And replication or overlap would only effect windows based units. Borland Delphi does not exist. Inprise Delphi does not exist. Embarcadero is new. The fact remains that Lazarus/FPC predate Embarcadero's purchase of Delphi. Therefore it was their responsibility to do execute DUE DILIGENCE prior to their purchase.

shows). But for anybody else, this is a bit worrisome. :-( I guess we will just have to wait and see what the judge decides.

Please. I wouldn't spend too much time waiting. The reason Embarcadero was rescued from the chopping block was their owner loves the language. Embarcadero is not going to make enemies. I'm sure if they have a legitimate complaint something will be done. Lazarus/FPC far more ubiquitous than Delphi. And without Lazarus. Delphi has no future. As sad as that sounds.

Killing or slowing this project would mean certain death for pascal (as a whole) as an adopted language. And FPC/Lazarus is the only reason why developers consider pacal as a viable option. And some businesses prefer a commercial product they can pay for Delphi. But Delphi will never again be the product they once were. -------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20120508/cc904f93/attachment.html>

funded. I repeat Delphi has changed ownership 3 times SINCE FPC and or Lazarus and came to be. Google recently stole Java from Oracle. Their claim is with much merit. google has been stealing IP left and right. They have to be stopped.

Delphi, Lazarus, FPC must learn to co-exist. This project must not fail. All parties in FPC/Lazarus and Delphi must accept the present market as fighting each-other would certainly mean the demise of all three projects. And Lazarus/FPC serves the greatest good, and therefore must be defended. -------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20120508/bf9d415c/attachment.html>

Andrew Brunner wrote

I've never ran a check to see what is different in units.

I'm not referring to implementation (source code) - only the API and functionality.

?Delphi is Windows ONLY.

Not any more. :) As of Delphi XE2 it officially supports Windows, Mac OS X and iOS. There seems to be talks about Linux too.

is new. ?The fact remains that Lazarus/FPC predate Embarcadero's purchase of Delphi. ?Therefore it was their?responsibility?to?do execute DUE?DILIGENCE?prior to their purchase.

You assumption seems wrong. Oracle bought Sun (which included the Java product) AFTER Android was created/released by Google. That still didn't stop Oracle from taking Google to court. As far as I understand it, if you bought a company, you get the company, its products (it's intellectual property) and the history of those products - unless explicitly specified otherwise.

Please. ?I wouldn't spend too much time waiting. ?The reason?Embarcadero was rescued from the chopping block was their owner loves the language. ?Embarcadero is not going to make enemies.

Going by the history of many projects and companies - love has NO say in business. It's all about the money!

And without Lazarus. Delphi has no future.

That's wishful
Regards,
? - Graeme -

Stealing IP ? That depends on your point of view.

My view is that IP itself is theft. The concept of IP is fundamentally flawed.

Knowledge should be free for all, and not 'owned' by someone for mere monetary gain.

IP is much like the church and its universal truths in the middle ages. I thought we got rid of those shackles, now we get other ones. Instead of church, we have large corporations.

If someone found a cure for all kinds of cancer, and kept it for himself using the IP umbrella, I'd label him a criminal against humankind and send him to trial in The Hague.

Michael.

Article April 2009 http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/press/018363 Details specifically from Oracle what i've been trying to tell you. -------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20120508/99ebaa37/attachment.html>

Stealing IP ? That depends on your point of view.

Ownership is always a perspective issue. We all just try to carve out ownership. Patents offer a way to convert work product into other things.

I agree. But the way in which problems are solved and solutions are brought to market should be somewhat sacred.

IP is much like the church and its universal truths in the middle ages. I thought we got rid of those shackles, now we get other ones. Instead of church, we have large corporations.

I agree.

Not if he or she was a big pharma employee. They would be given a gold watch and a few high fives. ;-)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20120508/42d3987d/attachment-0001.html>

Andrew Brunner wrote

Article April 2009 ?http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/press/018363 Details?specifically?from Oracle what i've been trying to tell you.

Google purchased the initial developer of the software, Android Inc., in 2005. Then Google later unveiled the Android distribution in 2007. Both events pre-date the Oracle purchase of Sun.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_version_history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_%28operating_system%29

parallels. Java runs on all platforms. Lazarus/FPC runs on all platforms. Delphi does / did not. They can't retro-actively go back and re-invent what we all know was Delphi and go after the Lazarus project. Lazarus will have major differences of that I'm sure. Bare windows API calls after that
- are point of fact - Fair Use and not protected by US Copyright law. -------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20120508/2833144e/attachment.html>

IP is much like the church and its universal truths in the middle ages. I thought we got rid of those shackles, now we get other ones. Instead of church, we have large corporations.

-1 please leave Christianism out of your rant.

If it wasn't for the Christian-based Solidarity movement Poland would still be a communist dictatorship ala-China. Solidarity even had religious services in their protests.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ostrowiec_Solidarnosc_20100815.jpg Also recommend watching the film "The man of iron / Cz?owiek z ?elaza" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMOBgjIDnGM&feature=relmfu

So much for saying that we are the opressors.

I wrote church, not christianism. That's a world of difference.

I have no problems with individual christians and their belief.

Michael.

That's I read that I had understood it as what
Michael has just asserted :-)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20120508/a60499a4/attachment.html>

----- Oorspronkelijk e-mail -----

FPC and it's core design have been around prior to Embarcadero's purchase of Delphi from Inprise. At the point of purchase Embarcadero was responsible for objecting to FPC and they could have avoided said purchase.

Andrew,

that same argument could be made for Oracle's purchase of Sun (and therefore java IP) with regard to Google and Android's Dalvik.

Java was being open sourced by Sun a few years prior to the takeover. Android was around, with Dalvik compiler and language similar to java, prior to the purchase.

what I'm worried more about is that there are open implementations of the java specification (read: jvm) around. OK, they strive to be api-compliant and implement all the interfaces of the entire JRE libraries and do not tend to cherry-pick features/classes.

If Oracle wins, then it might be the end of java and java developments alltogether. This being a pascal-oriented mailinglist, I probably should hold my tongue :-), but I would find that sad. (both as a professional and hobby developer)

Oracle doesn't have the backing of a java-community anymore since they purchased Sun and started dismantling the community processes (JCP). I doubt this move will win them souls.

On the other hand, with the demise of .net and java in a 2 year timeframe, maybe OP skills wouldn't look so bad after all :-)

(yes, I know, with 10+ years of Delphi experience I still have to explain on every job/networking session that pascal isn't dead - so say we all)

mvg,
Dimitri Smits
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20120508/6ec31b5f/attachment.html>

This procedure may apply to US law (copyright), but not to EU law (author's right, droit d'auteur).

DoDi

what I'm worried more about is that there are open implementations of the java specification (read: jvm) around. OK, they strive to be api-compliant and implement all the interfaces of the entire JRE libraries and do not tend to cherry-pick features/classes.

There exist more derived implementations, like native compilers from Java into machine code. Such certified compilers are available for almost all microcontrollers, where they allow to replace any microcontroller by a different one, while maintaining bit-identical operation of existing code.

DoDi

Andrew Brunner wrote

They would be given a gold watch and a few high fives. ;-)

He then will sell the watch, buy shares of food companies and get extremely rich regarding the need of starving masses.

-Michael

Michael Schnell wrote

On 05/08/2012 03:29 PM, Andrew Brunner wrote: > They would be given a gold watch and a few high fives. ;-) He then will sell the watch, buy shares of food companies and get extremely rich regarding the need of starving masses.

Since when have food companies sold to the starving masses?

This is getting off-topic. Consensus appears to be that in Europe FPC's safe, possibly less so in the USA.

No, he grumbled that money had been spent writing something that could be defeated by loading a different operating system. I'm pointing out that there are at least two categories of malware (or state-sanctioned spyware) which apply to any OS, since they are hidden at a lower level (Flash or SMM BIOS).

It's very much comparable to Geohot's hack of the Sony Playstation: he attacked the MMU before Sony's loader attempted to run, and was able to extract compromising information.

Quoting Hans :

"Millions of taxes, spent for the development of that software, are burnt by an simple update of already existing software (Linux and AV). <grumble> "

which I gather is that he /is/ grumbling about /the/ same assumption you deemed /not safe/...

... which you are going into more detail here...

It's very much comparable to Geohot's hack of the Sony Playstation: he attacked the MMU before Sony's loader attempted to run, and was able to extract compromising information.

... and here :)

To recap, I had an impression you were rebutting what Hans wrote where in reality you both wrote about the same thing :)

(this is getting too off topic, EOT from me ;)
L.

And yes:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/05/31/no_copyright_java_api/ apparently, the judge ruled the APIs in question can't be copyrighted.

From the ruling: "So long as the specific code used to implement a

method is different, anyone is free under the Copyright Act to write his or her own code to carry out exactly the same function or specification of any methods used in the Java API"
"It does not matter that the declaration or method header lines are identical. Under the rules of Java, they must be identical to declare a method specifying the same functionality ? even when the implementation is different. When there is only one way to express an idea or function, then everyone is free to do so and no one can monopolize that expression."

More quotes from the judgement as well as the entire verdict, I think: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120531/15383819155/judge-delivers-thorough-complete-smackdown-oracles-copyright-claims.shtml ... where the judge also says the structure/hierarchy (java.package.Class.method) of the API is a bit creative but also a command structure, a symbol or method of operation and therefore not copyrightable.

Glad the judgement came down on the side of sanity and together with the earlier European case, at least some sense prevails...

Reinier