The Oracle case was complicated, and is a series of courts reversing courts and courts reversing juries, and I'm not sure you can express it so simply in one sentence.
On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 1:23 PM Pamela Chestek <pam...@chesteklegal.com> wrote: > On 7/3/2019 3:09 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > > I have no problem with disallowing direct copying… unless there is > > only one (or an otherwise very small number of) way to express the > > API so it will naturally come up similar (or even identical). > So I put you on the Oracle side of the case in Oracle v. Google? That > was the allegation, direct copying of headers. > > Pam > > Pamela S. Chestek > Chestek Legal > PO Box 2492 > Raleigh, NC 27602 > 919-800-8033 > pam...@chesteklegal.com > www.chesteklegal.com > > > _______________________________________________ > License-discuss mailing list > License-discuss@lists.opensource.org > > http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org > -- Bruce Perens - Partner, OSS.Capital.
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
