Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Oracle Not Satisfied With Potential $150,000; Goes Against Judge's Warning

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the courtroom-hail-mary dept.

Android 234

bobwrit writes with news about how the monetary damages in the Google v. Oracle case might shake out. On Thursday, Judge Alsup told Oracle the most it could expect for statutory damages was a flat $150,000, a far cry from the $6.1 billion Oracle wanted in 2011, or even the $2.8 million offered by Google as a settlement. However, Oracle still thinks it can go after infringed profits, even though Judge Alsup specifically warned its lawyers they were making a mistake. He said, "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions." Groklaw has a detailed post about today's events.

cancel ×

234 comments

U.S. court systems (-1, Flamebait)

sierrajudas (2637315) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973623)

RIAA has been awarded millions in their pursuits against individuals who gave some music away. Then we have a company that is blatantly abusing copyright laws and makes tens of billions an year, and they get punished $150,000!

Someone should look into US court system.

Re:U.S. court systems (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39973663)

"Leave me alone!"
"You can return."
"Stop!"
"You may return."
"No, please! Don't remind me of my worthlessness!"
"You must return."
"No! I beg you! Leave me to my Gamemakerlessness!"
"You shall return to Gamemakerdom! You're absolutely worthless without Gamemaker. Gamemaker's the best. Nothing is superior to Gamemaker. There is no more truly will away for you!"
"Wow! Such a thing! You've convinced me. I'm 100% worthless without Gamemaker. As a software programmer of over 20 years, I will switch to Gamemaker. I can't be a True Programmer until I do. My Gamemakerlessness must be the cause of my awful love life, my depression, and all of my problems."

This is your future. You shall return to Gamemakerdom!

Re:U.S. court systems (-1, Offtopic)

Sarten-X (1102295) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973721)

I would like to convert to Gamemakerdom, as I believe it to be preferable to PHP, but I cannot acquire the money for the license. If you buy it for me, I will join the bliss of Gamemakerful Nirvana.

Re:U.S. court systems (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39974049)

"Psst... Hey pal, you're dying of cancer, and everyone's pretty happy about it."

Re:U.S. court systems (5, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973689)

Blatantly abusing the copyright of a full 9 lines of code? When I was teaching introductory CS courses, we would not even accuse students of cheating over 9 identical lines of code.

Re:U.S. court systems (5, Informative)

Githaron (2462596) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973837)

Not only that but the function is so simple [notavailablein.ca] that it could have been a complete accident.

Re:U.S. court systems (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39973961)

The engineer has admitted he "probably" copy-pasted the code over.

(Google wasn't exactly running a 'clean room', and Android engineers were also contributing to Sun Java.)

Re:U.S. court systems (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39974169)

The engineer made was rewriting the sort function for dalvik and contributed it back to java. He was the original author of the java sort function, and reused the java sort range check function since he believed it would all be reintegrated back into the the original java sort.

Re:U.S. court systems (0)

tomhath (637240) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973965)

And it shouldn't be 9 lines anyway. Someone doesn't know how to use OR in a boolean expression. Looks like they were trying to get their LOC metric up

Re:U.S. court systems (1, Interesting)

Githaron (2462596) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974179)

Barring formatting changes, considering the exception is different depending on the case, there would still need to be nine lines. I do wonder why they did not use the if/else construct though. I seems kind of wasteful to run checks on cases at are no longer possible.

Re:U.S. court systems (4, Insightful)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974347)

Because after the exception is thrown we magically just move on to the next if?

Re:U.S. court systems (5, Informative)

jimshatt (1002452) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974377)

Those checks aren't run because an exception is thrown before that.

Re:U.S. court systems (5, Informative)

DVega (211997) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974455)

Not only simple and small. The author of both copies is the same person: Josh Bloch. He wrote the original lines while working for Sun, and repeated the same code while working for Google. So, according the law, Josh Bloch plagiarized himself

Re:U.S. court systems (1)

mrbester (200927) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974555)

Not only that but the function doesn't work unless there is some sort of zero indexed array whose highest index is equal to the array length.

Re:U.S. court systems (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39973839)

Teachers would be more tempted to accuse students of cheating if the school had a bounty of ten million dollars per caught student.

Re:U.S. court systems (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973881)

Anybody know what the nine lines are?

Re:U.S. court systems (5, Funny)

thegarbz (1787294) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974057)

You're soft. Back when I was teaching CS courses we punished students for copying even 1 line of code.

Not a lot of people passed. Had something to do with "int main() {". Hmmm I wonder if that line has been copyrighted...

- Larry P.

Re:U.S. court systems (2, Funny)

uncqual (836337) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974107)

Dude, you were easy. We didn't let them use the same characters. Usually the blatant copying of a "{" nailed them - lots of people seemed to copy that for some reason. The TAs loved it though - grading the assignments was really easy.

Re:U.S. court systems (1)

foradoxium (2446368) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974195)

university of phoenix does.

Re:U.S. court systems (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39974547)

okay, I've seen the level of difficulty of a university of phoenix programming class and some of the final projects could be written in under 9 lines of code..

Re:U.S. court systems (4, Funny)

Barbara, not Barbie (721478) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974809)

pretty much any c program can be written in under 9 lines of code. Of course, some of those lines will be very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very long ...

Re:U.S. court systems (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39973741)

Someone should look into US court system.

For anyone who could seriously do that, it's already rigged up just the way they want.

I wish the Liberals would stop your obsessive fixation on "the rich" and focus instead on "the powerful". Money, political office, and media access are all forms of power. You fixate on one (wealth) like you do and you become blind to how the others are also being abused.

You have any idea how petty and childish you sound when you worry about trivia like Warren Buffet's secretary? What exactly is the point of that when the court system destroys families who did little or no harm (sharing mp3s) while giving megacorps symbolic slaps on the wrist to create the illusion of accountability?

If Occupy was something more than a bunch of naive hippies they would be Occupying the old-money families and the media companies, not public parks. Not that I am sayin' that's a good idea, just sayin' the fact they aren't doing this says a lot about how deeply they comprehend the problem.

Re:U.S. court systems (4, Insightful)

Surt (22457) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973909)

The rich have pretty close to 100% control over political office and media access. I don't really see the point in differentiating.

Re:U.S. court systems (-1, Troll)

shibashaba (683026) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974649)

Liberals spend all their time diverting attention away from everything else and just focus on the income tax. They also screw with the economy to the point that any 'poor' person has to go and beg the government to live.

Perfect example of this would be where I live. Developers saw an explosive population boom in our area, and wanted to build a small town with lots of apartments. All the liberals freaked out and forced them to build endless lines of McMansions, and called it the 'rural crescent'. They claimed they were saving the enviorment, which is a huge load of crap. Apartments house people much more efficiently power wise, and make mass transit much easier. It's absolutely impossible to implement mass transit in this 'rural crescent'. The rest of the county has it now, and for over ten years has yet to be financially stable. They''ll probably never bother in this new area, they know it's just not feasible.

And what about the poor (working class) that can't afford a POS $500,000 house? Tough shit. Maybe you can spend all day in line the one day every 4 years the waiting list for government housing(that doesn't exist) is open.

But hey, maybe the poor will save a couple hundred dollars a year in income tax. But in the mean time they can't afford a place to live, gas to get work through the ridiculous traffic(worst in the nation) or anything else that comes with this 'Utopian, environmentally friendly' new community.

Re:U.S. court systems (2)

sjames (1099) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974699)

Yes, because there's so many powerful poor people and so many powerless rich people.

Re:U.S. court systems (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39973753)

RIAA has been awarded millions in their pursuits against individuals who gave some music away. Then we have a company that is blatantly abusing copyright laws and makes tens of billions an year, and they get punished $150,000!

Someone should look into US court system.

This comment is so bloated with troll and stupid ... I believe my brain bled by reading it.

Re:U.S. court systems (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39973777)

Hey look, another bonch stockpuppet gets the first post with an anti-Google post.

Re:U.S. court systems (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39974545)

Hey! You remembered to post AC this time. Good Job!

Re:U.S. court systems (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39973835)

Christ, not this fucking anti-Google troll again. What a worthless repugnant human being. I bet his mother prays he gets hit by a bus, preferably being dragged for thirty miles before being shaken loose, sent careening into a tar pond where, two million years from now, he'll be dug up, recognized as the evil little bastard that he is, and put on display as "Microsoftus uptheassus".

Re:U.S. court systems (1)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974423)

Sure, because only Microsoft dislikes Google. Couldn't be Apple, or Yahoo, or the government, or just a private individual.

Re:U.S. court systems (1, Insightful)

Arker (91948) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974701)

RIAA has been awarded millions in their pursuits against individuals who gave some music away. Then we have a company that is blatantly abusing copyright laws and makes tens of billions an year, and they get punished $150,000!

Someone should look into US court system.

I was actually thinking the same thing. And you're at -1 flamebait at the moment for speaking it. Oh well I can burn some karma if need be, because this needs to be said.

Not that there is anything wrong with what google did here that I can see, that's not the point at all, but dont you see the double-standard here? When the RIAA sues a private individual for alleged non-commercial copyright infringement, they throw the book at them. When google gets caught here, and I would argue that the 9 lines are de minimis and probably functionally determined and the court is wrong on this, BUT, it appears that is not what the court has decided, so let's go with that. Google infringed copyright, commercially no less! and... the judge is (quite rightly) informing oracle that despite this determination the damage is minimal and therefore their recovery is likely to be a LOT less than their lawyer fees.

Great. But why doesnt it work that way when the RIAA sues somebodies grandmother over a Britney Spears recording? Surely that is an even more minor issue than what google is stuck with here, yet the punishment would likely be far greater. That's all I am saying.

Lots of works vs. one work (4, Informative)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974807)

When the RIAA sues, typically they sue over a large number of different copyright protected works; with up to $150,000 in statutory damages available per work without proof of actual damages or infringers profits, they are able to rack up large statutory damage awards this way.

In the charge at issue here, Oracle has gotten a verdict on Google infringing a single work for which they have provided no evidence of actual damages or infringers profits. With up to $150,000 in statutory damages available per work, that gives them $150,000 in statutory damages available.

Its worth noting that the judge isn't informing Oracle that their damages are minimal. He has informed Oracle that they didn't bother presenting evidence on damages or infringers profits from the infringement of the work at issue, and since they didn't do that, there is no evidence in the case on which to find anything other than statutory damages.

The difference here is not a problem with the court system (I'm not saying that the court system does not, in many ways, favor the wealthier litigant, but the difference in the damages available in the two kinds of cases at issue in this subthread isn't actually that kind of issue.)

If there is a problem, its with the way copyright statutory damages work (either in being too generous in the kinds of cases the RIAA brings or being too stingy in the kind of case Oracle has brought.) But its not the the people targetted by the RIAA have succeeded less well in cases where the facts at issue were parallel to those in Oracle v. Google, its that the legal rules provide larger awards without proof of actual damages when lots of works are at issue than when fewer works are at issue.

Yes, I know this is off-topic (-1, Offtopic)

Leebert (1694) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973637)

But there is no way that Slashdot will call attention to this in a regular story:

http://investors.geek.net/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=672629 [geek.net]

Excerpt:

FAIRFAX, Va., May 11, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- Geeknet, Inc. (Nasdaq:GKNT), the online network for the global geek community, today announced that its Board of Directors has authorized the Company and its advisors to explore strategic alternatives with respect to its online media business, including the SourceForge, Slashdot and Freecode websites. The Company and its advisors will evaluate a range of options to maximize shareholder value, including, but not limited to, a potential sale of the Company's online media business, investing additional capital to expand the online media business, or other possible transactions involving the online media business.

(Logo: http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20120510/MM05555LOGO [prnewswire.com] )

Ken Langone, Chairman and CEO of Geeknet, stated, "After much discussion, our management team and Board of Directors have decided to begin a formal review of our media business to realize the full potential of these valuable assets and maximize shareholder value. With more than 46 million total unique visitors last month, our media properties have a large community of engaged users and we are committed to creating the best online experience for them."

Re:Yes, I know this is off-topic (-1)

Jeng (926980) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973671)

Well, that does explain Bonch.

Re:Yes, I know this is off-topic (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39973813)

GreatBunzinni [slashdot.org] , real name Rui Maciel, has been using anonymous posts [slashdot.org] and sockpuppets to accuse nearly 20 people of being employed by a PR firm to astroturf Slashdot, without any evidence. Using his sockpuppets, he mods up these anonymous posts while modding down the accused in order to filter their viewpoints. GreatBunzinni accidentally outed himself [slashdot.org] as the anonymous troll who has been posting these accusations. For example, he wrote the same post almost verbatim, first using his logged-in account [slashdot.org] followed by an anonymous post [slashdot.org] days later. Note the use of the same script and wording.

It turns out GreatBunzinni is a 31-year-old C++/Java programmer from Almada, Portugal named Rui Maciel, with a civil engineering degree from Instituto Superior Técnico and a hobby working with electronics. He runs Kubuntu and is active on the KDE mailing list. Rui Maciel has accounts at OSNews, Launchpad, ProgrammersHeaven, the Ubuntu forums, and of course Slashdot.

Most of the users who Rui targets have done nothing else but criticize Google for something or praise a competitor. Many of them are subscribers who get the first post because subscribers see stories earlier than non-subscribers. After one of Rui's accusations gets posted, the original post receives a surge of "Troll" and "Overrated" moderations from his sockpuppets, while Rui's posts get modded up. Often, additional anonymous posters will appear to give support and receive upmods. At the same time, accused users who defend themselves are modded "Offtopic."

Rui Maciel's contact information
Email: greatbunzinni@gmail.com [mailto] , greatbunzinni@engineer.com [mailto] , or rui.maciel@gmail.com [mailto]
IM: greatbunzinni@jabber.org [jabber] (the same Jabber account currently listed on his Slashdot account)
Blog: http://rui_maciel.users.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]
Programming projects: http://www.programmersheaven.com/user/GreatBunzinni/contributions [programmersheaven.com]

The following accounts have been confirmed to be Rui Maciel, in order of activity. You'll notice that they all share a posting style and often reply to each other:

HarrySquatter [slashdot.org]
Galestar [slashdot.org]
GameboyRMH [slashdot.org]
ZeroSumHappiness [slashdot.org]
Jeng [slashdot.org]
scot4875 [slashdot.org]
Nerdfest [slashdot.org]
TheNarrator [slashdot.org]
flurp [slashdot.org]
anonymov [slashdot.org]
chrb [slashdot.org]
zidium [slashdot.org]
NicknameOne [slashdot.org]
Nicknamename [slashdot.org]
forkfail [slashdot.org]
icebike [slashdot.org]
ilguido [slashdot.org]
psiclops [slashdot.org]
Toonol [slashdot.org]
russotto [slashdot.org]
rreyelts [slashdot.org]
symbolset [slashdot.org]

tl;dr: An Ubuntu fan named Rui Maciel is waging an organized trolling campaign using multiple sockpuppet accounts to filter Slashdot posts.

Re:Yes, I know this is off-topic (-1, Offtopic)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973905)

Wow. You must... like... really care... and shit.

Re:Yes, I know this is off-topic (-1, Troll)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974149)

I know I do, that fucking guy is annoying.

Mod GP up so the assholes at geeknet do something about this guy.

Re:Yes, I know this is off-topic (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39973855)

What does Geeknet's management review have to do with some Slashdot user you're obsessed with? I don't get it.

Re:Yes, I know this is off-topic (-1, Offtopic)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973907)

It's all part of his strange sexual perversion. I suggest you look away before he really gets going. Think John Travolta with a keyboard here.

Re:Yes, I know this is off-topic (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39973981)

What does Geeknet's management review have to do with some Slashdot user you're obsessed with? I don't get it.

It doesn't, but his post does show Slashdot's moderation system failing in a significant way. Or in other words, how Slashdot's moderation system can be manipulated with so few people.

Re:Yes, I know this is off-topic (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39974137)

No, it really doesn't, because most of his claims are no longer accurate as the posts in question were eventually moderated and metamoderated to the appropriate levels. Yes, posts get incorrectly modded up and down in the first 30 minutes of a stories life, but that's the nature of crowdsourcing. You simply can't expect to get a constant flow of great information, only that the quality of your information will increase with it's quantity; the more moderation points spent, the better the quality of the moderation. It's not a perfect system, or even a good system, it's just better than all the shitty alternatives. At any given time, you might see a bunch of shitty mods. Just like how at any given time, any Wikipedia article might be completely inaccurate garbage. This is what you get when you crowdsource.

Re:Yes, I know this is off-topic (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39974051)

bonch is a Slashdot employee/intern whose job it is to generate page views by trolling and inciting conspiracy theories.

There will be a huge spike of traffic right before Slashdot is sold off yet again ('its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house') and then, job done, bonch and his army of sockpuppets will disappear.

Re:Yes, I know this is off-topic (-1, Offtopic)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973789)

They've tried to fatten up instead of building muscle. Perhaps News Corp will be hungry for more acquisitions.

Re:Yes, I know this is off-topic (-1, Offtopic)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974459)

They'd roll Slashdot into Fox Interactive, then promptly migrate it to XenForo. *shudder*

Digg 2.0 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39973819)

Looks like Slashdot is about to go down the corporate rabbit hole. This will most likey result in slashvertisements being the primary (and possibly only ) source of new stories. Is there any social media website out there that isn't slowly turning into shit?

Re:Digg 2.0 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39973867)

What you put in is what you get out.

The more social a media website is, the shittier it ends up being.

Re:Digg 2.0 (-1, Offtopic)

sortadan (786274) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973955)

4chan is staying true to it's roots. Just yesterday they spent the whole night changing a Tea Party website to different incredibly offensive imagery and language after someone posted that the admin password was p9assw0rd. also reddit still had boat loads of cat pictures so there's that.

really though /. isn't doing too bad compared to ars or tech crunch. the only way i can stand them any more is through an rss feed, and even then just barely.

Re:Digg 2.0 (-1, Offtopic)

DeadCatX2 (950953) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974067)

re: ars, I've sworn off all Conde Nast properties now. I saw the ars moderators engaging in what I thought was abuse of moderator powers, labeling posts "trolls" and getting them minimized when they probably didn't deserve it. A centralized authority picking and choosing what gets suppressed and what doesn't - not what I want to see in a comment system.

I remember when I could go to ars and read about the latest hardware architecture and why it will be better than the last. That was back in the P4 days. They're just not worth reading anymore.

Re:Digg 2.0 (-1, Offtopic)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974339)

I have to agree with Ars, its gotten this kind of political bent now that i find a turn off. I go to a geeky site to read about geeky things, the latest CPUs or GPUs or some cool project like the Pi, not to hear some mods thoughts on the politics of the day.

I'd say the only thing really wrong with /. is our crazys just aren't entertaining anymore...anybody remember Twitter? i miss twit, he could take ANY story and turn it into a convoluted plot involving Gates and the Illuminati, so even though he was batshit as hell he was damned entertaining. Now frankly the best we got is the crazies i call the "FOSSies" because of their Moonie like devotion to all things GPL but they have NO flair or entertainment value. Frankly they are like the trolls you'll get in DM that call everyone faggot or nigger, only they call everyone shill or astroturfer that dares not to believe in their "God". Hell look at this very thread, it wasn't three posts before someone screamed nigger or faggot, in this case the nigger or "shill" comment which was the second post.

So I say if you want to fix /. ban ACs completely. It takes less than 3 minutes to make an account and you can put down your are a member of the Swedish bikini team for all the system cares, so damned near all the ACs now are nigger faggot posts. of course with the fucked up mod system one has to surf in negative mode simply because a well thought out viewpoint will be buried for the first few hours of a post if it goes against groupthink, sure the metamods will eventually correct it but who goes back two or three days to look at stories?

So get rid of ACs, put a system in place that keeps up with who is modding who so we can get rid of "modbombs" by those with a chip on their shoulder, perhaps if they downmod the same person X number of times they are blocked from modpoints or maybe by IP address to keep sockpuppets down, I'm not a coder so I'll leave that to guys who know that stuff, all I know is frankly the nigger faggot shill astroturfer shit ruins flow and its nearly always ACs pulling the shit so a good place to start would be to get rid of them or at least have a setting where one can simply block ALL ACs from view if they are less than say a +2 rating.

Re:Digg 2.0 (-1, Offtopic)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974479)

Also, I haven't seen Michael Kristopeit in a while. You know, cover in my shadow some more feeb and all that. Completely pathetic, blah blah.

Re:cower and all that (-1, Offtopic)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974517)

The first step to passing a Turing Test is finding a sufficiently programmable meme. I bet any 50 of you here could build chat bots better than some ten certain memes of which he is one. Seen those posts like :

"you orange must div in the muslim death but becaus yo how babby mrdured?"

Who is possibly posting those and why?

Re:AC's (0, Offtopic)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974483)

I'll politely disagree -

It's the flood of new accounts posting long sculpted messages on FP and the next 80 of us *are too lazy even to change the topic heading*. They're all signed in. Someone might even be spotting them $50 to get the Paid User preview of future stories so they can craft their long FP's.

Everyone keeps saying "bonch" but that feels to me more like a triple confusion of Set Theory. We definitely have shills now, more this year than any other year. But it's not clear that it's "one user", the next step is "one firm", but I can't believe that exactly one shill firm is ruling the waters - so I bet there's even 3-7 of them going on.

The AC's don't tend to post 12 line FP's with a message.

Re:AC's (-1, Offtopic)

inode_buddha (576844) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974587)

shit, I wish I could give you an "insightful" for that... Notice in this story how its bumped the whole discussion about Oracle down to the level that very few will really read it?

Re:Digg 2.0 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39974147)

Is there any social media website out there that isn't slowly turning into shit?

4chan is staying true to it's roots.

So... They are not turning to shit?

Re:Digg 2.0 (-1, Offtopic)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974039)

Third time's the charm? Andover.net bought Slashdot. VA Linux bought Andover.net. Then renamed themselves a few times (VA Linux, VA Research, SourceForge, now Geek.Net). What's another company or another name at this point? Maybe next they can be facebook/linked in for nerds. NerdVirgIn.com.

Re:Yes, I know this is off-topic (-1, Offtopic)

ExploHD (888637) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974393)

Read: "We, the board and CEO, think that we can extract much more money out these web sites. Once they get to a point where we know they're overvalued, they will be sold off so we can pocket more than what 99% of the population will make in their lifetime."

Re:Yes, I know this is off-topic (-1, Offtopic)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974729)

And this is what happens when you go public. Screw the user community, doing something cool, or even just being profitable. No, you have to grow and maximize shareholder value. In other words, all hail the next quarter, and screw the next year. execs can offload their shares and make millions while the company tanks.

I, for one, am shocked (5, Funny)

reiserifick (2616539) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973673)

that lawyers would ignore the advice of the judge and pursue ridiculous sums of money with no basis.

Re:I, for one, am shocked (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39974211)

Probably isn't their decision. Big boss told them he wants his money against what the lawyers and judges probably say.

Re:I, for one, am shocked (4, Insightful)

jd (1658) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974355)

The lawyers will be paid by Oracle, win or lose. They won't get paid if they're not involved in a lawsuit. Oracle wants them involved in a lawsuit that they will probably lose. Turning Oracle down is an expensive way to be ethical.

Those racing yachts cost money (4, Funny)

spirit_fingers (777604) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973725)

You have to feel sorry for Larry. He was hoping the Google settlement would pay his America's Cup expenses. $150k will barely cover In-N-Out burgers for the deck hands.

Re:Those racing yachts cost money (1)

steelfood (895457) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974425)

Not at all. I hear Larry's pretty happy about the outcome actually.

Its a no-brainer for Oracle. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39973739)

On the one hand, Oracle is giving up a potential maximum of $150,000 in statutory damages -- but in fact it would likely be rather less. On the other hand, if they go for actual damages they can get a ridiculous chunk of money and force Google to turn over all sorts of information on Google's profits if they win on that claim. $150,000 is peanuts to Oracle, so of course they're going to go for the moon.

I suspect they will end up with zero or token damages instead.

Re:Its a no-brainer for Oracle. (5, Informative)

Xtifr (1323) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973809)

I'm thinking that $9 (one dollar for each copied line) sounds like a nice number. :)

Re:Its a no-brainer for Oracle. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39974619)

...and, of course, triple it for damages.

Re:Its a no-brainer for Oracle. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39974627)

You suck at copyright math.

For a start, you forgot to multiply it by number of Android devices in existence! Recent claims by Google was something like 300m Android devices. Let's extrapolate a bit, by now it should be something around 350. Let's say 375.

375M * 9 = 3.375 billion dollars.

But wait, there's more! Google blatantly helped infringement by distributing Android sources to _everyone_. We can't calculate how many precisely infringed on Oracle's copyright by downloading the sources, so let's conservatively say 100 millions.

This makes the sum go up to 4.275 billion dollars, but let's just make it nice and round, 4 and a half.

Yep, now that looks like a legit copyright infringement fine to me, not like your misguided "$9".

Re:Its a no-brainer for Oracle. (2)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973831)

This is one starving law firm and legal department. Imagine taking this to the ends of the earth.

Secret lawfirm partners meeting chatter:

"Hey, with over fifty time keepers running on this thing, it might go negative numbers, but we'll keep the rep that we'll burn every litigation right down to the bitter end. After all, this isn't about who wins, it's who has more kerosene..."

"What do they care, after all. With a 8% COGS, and a stock price that's at insane multiple of earnings, they have to continue make Google look stupid. After all, they desperately want to be 'in the game' since the Sun acquisition boiled off and their server game is barely chugging. Good thing they have that database thing-oil well in the basement."

Feel free to add your own plausible remarks.

Re:Its a no-brainer for Oracle. (5, Funny)

jd (1658) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974381)

Old, wizened lawyer #1: "If we agree to Oracle's naive, stupid and utterly doomed plan, we will make ourselves look extremely stupid to the geeks."

Old, wizened lawyer #2: "The geeks can't afford us anyway, so who cares what they think? We'll make gob-loads of money off Oracle. Imagine what we can buy with that?"

Middle-aged, blue, slightly-fuzzy lawyer that looks remarkably like a sock puppet: "Coooooookies!!!!! Mrumrumrumrumrumrumrum"

Re:Its a no-brainer for Oracle. (1)

BooRadley (3956) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974709)

I really wish I had mod points for this. Thank you, sir.

Oracle's damages? Because Android has Java? (4, Interesting)

catmistake (814204) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973799)

What the fuck are they talking about...? Google pirated a GPLed programming language and used it in Android?!! What damages could Oracle possibly be listing? I wanna know. Show the damages, Oracle.

Re:Oracle's damages? Because Android has Java? (5, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973823)

Clearly, if Google had not developed Android, Oracle would have been able to market its own smartphone/tablet OS using Java, right?

Re:Oracle's damages? Because Android has Java? (5, Insightful)

Mike Buddha (10734) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973889)

Yeah, because they were headed in that direction anyway. What? You don't remember Java Phone 7? iJava? JavaCE? JavaOS? PalmJava? JavaGo? Hmm. Maybe I'm thinking of something else...

Oracle can go after infringers profits, but.. (4, Insightful)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973861)

Oracle can go after infringers profits, but in doing so it has to give up on statutory damages.

The Judge has pointed out that they haven't submitted any evidence supporting that Google has any profits associated with the rangeCheck method that is at issue, so this may not be a wise course of action.

Re:Oracle can go after infringers profits, but.. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39973947)

Also, Google doesn't make any direct profit on Android, I don't understand what Oracle are doing by going after their profits? The whole thing has been a huge joke from the beginning, Oracle should give up now before they embarrass themselves further.

Re:Oracle can go after infringers profits, but.. (2)

Kjella (173770) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974465)

Awwwwwww judge, don't clue them in. I'd so like to see Oracle awarded $1 for this whole shenanigans, it'd be a much more embarrassing result than losing the case.

Re:Oracle can go after infringers profits, but.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39974795)

Hey fuckface, don't start shit in the subject like that. I hope you fucking bleed out of your ass and die.

What are the 9 lines? (2)

adisakp (705706) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973923)

Can someone post the 9 infringing lines of code here for us to see?

Re:What are the 9 lines? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39973983)

From OpenJDK:

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

                if (fromIndex > toIndex)

                        throw new IllegalArgumentException("fromIndex(" + fromIndex +
                                              ") > toIndex(" + toIndex+")");

                if (fromIndex 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 arrayLen)
                        throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(toIndex);

        }

}

Re:What are the 9 lines? (3, Informative)

adisakp (705706) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973989)

Wait - is this it??? [brainbits.ca]

Re:What are the 9 lines? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39974001)

taken from https://plus.google.com/115445134403759043734/posts/9QCzzR2rALX

From OpenJDK and Dalvik:

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

if (fromIndex > toIndex)

throw new IllegalArgumentException("fromIndex(" + fromIndex +
") > toIndex(" + toIndex+")");

if (fromIndex arrayLen)
throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(toIndex);

}

Re:What are the 9 lines? (2)

dmesg0 (1342071) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974015)

private static void rangeCheck(int arrayLen, int fromIndex, int toIndex) {
        if (fromIndex > toIndex)
                throw new IllegalArgumentException("fromIndex(" + fromIndex +
                                      ") > toIndex(" + toIndex+")");
        if (fromIndex arrayLen)
                throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(toIndex);
}

Hopefully Oracle won't sue me for this...

Re:What are the 9 lines? (3, Informative)

dmesg0 (1342071) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974059)

Hmm, slashdot doesn't won't infringing code to be posted, it removed a few lines during posting.
Here's the original: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3951480 [ycombinator.com]

Re:What are the 9 lines? (1)

dmesg0 (1342071) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974061)

s/won't/want/

Re:What are the 9 lines? (1)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974505)

It's the < that Slashdot ate (plus a pile of stuff after). And actually it was the browser that did it, Slashdot just outputs your HTML verbatim.

Re:What are the 9 lines? (3, Insightful)

DeadCatX2 (950953) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974081)

No, they won't sue you because /. ate your <

Re:What are the 9 lines? (5, Funny)

demonbug (309515) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974167)

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

        if (fromIndex > toIndex)

                throw new IllegalArgumentException("fromIndex(" + fromIndex +

                                      ") > toIndex(" + toIndex+")");

        if (fromIndex arrayLen)

                throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(toIndex);
}

Hopefully Oracle won't sue me for this...

Oh great, now you owe Oracle 6 billion karma. Nothing but Larry Ellison PR bits on Slashdot from here on out.

Re:What are the 9 lines? (2, Informative)

DarthBling (1733038) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974037)

Shamelessly stolen from Githaron's post [slashdot.org]

http://notavailablein.ca/2012/05/googles-infringement-against-oracle-9-lines-of-code/ [notavailablein.ca]

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);
}

Re:What are the 9 lines? (1)

pr0fessor (1940368) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974215)

isn't it supposed to be rangeCheck() [docjar.com] but that's not nine lines so... not sure.

Obviousness (3, Informative)

markkezner (1209776) | more than 2 years ago | (#39973969)

I presume the 9 lines in question refer to TimSort.rangeCheck() [oswego.edu] .

Have you ever looked at it? If I had to implement that method, I probably would have done it the exact same way.

Re:Obviousness (1)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974335)

private static void checkRange(int arrayLen, int fromIndex, int toIndex)
{
            if (fromIndex > toIndex)
                    throw new InvalidArgumentException("fromIndex(" + fromIndex +
                                          ") > toIndex(" + toIndex+")");
            if (toIndex > arrayLen)
                    throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(toIndex);
            if (fromIndex < 0)
                    throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(fromIndex);
}

See? Now it's completely different!

Random aside: Is it just me, or is this going to fail if toIndex == arrayLen? If the array has 100 items, array[100] = 0 will be bad but rangeCheck(100, 17, 100) will not throw an exception.

Or am I missing something? I don't know Java...

Re:Obviousness (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39974637)

Random aside: Is it just me, or is this going to fail if toIndex == arrayLen? If the array has 100 items, array[100] = 0 will be bad but rangeCheck(100, 17, 100) will not throw an exception.

Or am I missing something? I don't know Java...

Obviously it's a [from,to)-style range.

Re:Obviousness (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39974665)

The comments clear it up:

/**
  * Checks that fromIndex and toIndex are in range, and throws an
  * appropriate exception if they aren't.
  *
  * @param arrayLen the length of the array
  * @param fromIndex the index of the first element of the range
  * @param toIndex the index after the last element of the range
  * @throws IllegalArgumentException if fromIndex > toIndex
  * @throws ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException if fromIndex arrayLen
  */

Still a little confusing, since I think most would assume toIndex is the last index, rather than the one after.

Re:Obviousness (1)

mrbester (200927) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974679)

If I had to implement that method I'd have checked that the highest index of a zero based array is length - 1 for my third comparison...

The next value will be... (1)

luizd (716122) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974129)

See! it is obvious!

1) $ 6100000000 = 6,1e9
2) $ 2800000 = 2,8e6
3) $ 150000 = 1,5e5
4) ???

base series: 6.1, 2.8, 1.5... 0.91!
power series: 9, 6, 5... 4!
So: 0.91e4 or 9.1e3 or $ 9100

If I were Oracle, I'll be happy with the $ 150.000 offer.

Can we say Eidetic memory (2)

niftymitch (1625721) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974177)

From WP:
"Eidetic memory ( /adtk/), commonly referred to as photographic memory,
is a medical term, popularly defined as the ability to recall images, sounds, or
objects in memory with extreme precision and in abundant volume."

I would assert(tm) that the class of programmers a company like Google hires
would have Eidetic memory to one degree or another. Fundamental patterns
would stick and be used little different that humming a tune in the shower.

"Double double toil and trouble fire burn and cauldron bubble... " I would further
assert(R) that despite the geekish bent of this community a very large number
could continue for nine line and perhaps a lot more.

If nine lines is worth billions then programming is in trouble as a profession
except for those that live like mushrooms.

AND most importantly these qualities could hold an individual hostage to the
point that an employer that wishes to enforce copyright must continue to
pay these employees full and fair for the reasonable legal length of such copyrights
if they wish to enforce such limitations to this degree.

Watching this is fun. (5, Interesting)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974325)

Oracle has a history of going after smaller companies, (Ask me how I know.) and threatening litigation. Smaller companies usually fold, and just pay out. It is cheaper than court. I love that they have decided to go after someone who can afford to say "Let's let the courts decide."

But Oracle said... (3, Informative)

inode_buddha (576844) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974369)

But Oracle said this isn't about money! In court no less!

Oracle statutory damages demands? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39974533)

As calculated by Hollywood accountants right?

9 lines (2)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974567)

In the beginning there was the word.

Then God ran out of money, and sold off the word to Oracle.

"May 12, 2012. In a highly controversial Ohio court filing today, Oracle Corp. demanded damages of 6 quintillion dollars for the unauthorized use of derived literary works, including the sun, sea and sky, and fishes, animals and rocks dated from about 6000 years ago. A tiny chosen sample of humans is also expected to be sold off to the highest bidder to pay for initial court expenses."

Bad Summary (5, Informative)

dlsmith (993896) | more than 2 years ago | (#39974757)

The larger figures quoted ($6.1 billion) refer to the estimated total for all infringement claims. The $150,000 discussed today is for one claim. Of course, the whole case doesn't revolve around the nine lines of code. The big (unresolved) questions are about copyright of the APIs and infringement of patents.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...