Op-ed: Oracle attorney says Google’s court victory might kill the GPL by Annette Hurst.
From the header:
Annette Hurst is an attorney at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe who represented Oracle in the recent Oracle v. Google trial. This op-ed represents her own views and is not intended to represent those of her client or Ars Technica.
The Oracle v. Google trial concluded yesterday when a jury returned a verdict in Google’s favor. The litigation began in 2010, when Oracle sued Google, saying that the use of Java APIs in Android violated copyright law. After a 2012 trial, a judge held that APIs can’t be copyrighted at all, but that ruling was overturned on appeal. In the trial this month, Google successfully argued that its use of Java APIs, about 11,500 lines of code in all, was protected by “fair use.”
I won’t propogate Annette’s rant but you can read it for yourself at: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/05/op-ed-oracle-attorney-says-googles-court-victory-might-kill-the-gpl/.
What are free software supporters to make of their long time deranged, drooling critic expressing support for GPL?
Should they flee as pursued by wraiths on wings?
Should they stuff their cloaks in their ears?
Are these like the lies of Suraman?
Or perhaps better, Wormtongue?
My suggestion? Point to Annette’s rant to alert others but don’t repeat it, don’t engage it, just pass over it in silence.
Repeating evil counsel gives it legitimacy.
Yours.