谷歌跟oracle

Google has successfully defended itself from a $9 billion lawsuit from Oracle. In doing so, Google’s lawyers have prevented a dangerous precedent that would have given old copyright-hoarding tech companies a way to sue lots of startups and open source projects.

谷歌已經成功地為Oracle的90億美元訴訟辯護。 這樣做，谷歌的律師阻止了一個危險的先例，該先例使擁有版權的老牌技術公司能夠起訴許多初創公司和開源項目。

If this is the first you’ve heard about the trial, I don’t blame you. It was basically just a bunch of lawyers trying to explain the intricacies of APIs and copyright law to a jury of non-technical Californians, using metaphors like file cabinets and bookshelves.

如果這是您第一次聽到有關審判的信息，我不會怪您。 基本上，只有一群律師試圖使用文件柜和書架之類的隱喻向非技術加利福尼亞人組成的陪審團解釋API和版權法的復雜性。

When the person in the row ahead of you is buying tickets on StubHub during testimony, you know you’re in the weeds.

當您前面的人在作證時在StubHub上購買門票時，您就知道自己在草叢中。

- Brian Bishop reporting for The Verge

-Brian Bishop為The Verge報道

Here’s a rough timeline of how the whole conflict unfolded:

這是整個沖突如何展開的大致時間表：

2005: Google acquires Android. They opt to use Java over Microsoft’s C#, negotiate with Sun Microsystems, who own Java, but fail to secure a licensing deal.

2005年 ：Google收購了Android。 他們選擇在Microsoft的C＃上使用Java，并與擁有Java的Sun Microsystems進行談判，但未能獲得許可協議。

2006: Google rejects Sun’s alleged offer of a three-year Java license for $20 million plus 10% of Google’s Android-related revenue, capped at $25 million.

2006年 ：Google拒絕了Sun提出的以2,000萬美元的價格獲得三年Java許可證的提議，外加Google與Android相關的收入的10％(最高2500萬美元)。

2007: Google publicly announces Android, and its use of Dalvik, a Java-compatible virtual machine.

2007年 ：Google公開發布了Android及其對Java兼容虛擬機Dalvik的使用。

2010: Oracle acquires Sun for its Java patents and copyrights, then files a lawsuit accusing Google of infringing upon seven of Sun’s Java patents.

2010年 ：Oracle以其Java專利和版權收購了Sun，然后提起訴訟，指控Google侵犯了Sun的7項Java專利。

2011: The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office dismisses five of the seven patent allegations. Oracle seeks damages of up to $6 billion. A settlement can’t be reached.

2011年 ：美國專利商標局駁回了七項專利指控中的五項。 Oracle要求最高賠償60億美元。 無法達成和解。

2012: Oracle and Google go to trial in a San Francisco district court and Google wins.

2012年： Oracle和Google在舊金山地方法院受審，Google獲勝。

2014: An appeals court reverses the district court’s decision, stating that an API is copyrightable.

2014年：上訴法院推翻了地區法院的裁決，指出API具有版權。

2016: A second trial starts over whether Google’s use of Java’s APIs was fair use.

2016年：關于谷歌對Java API的使用是否合理使用的第二次審判開始。

Sarah Jeong, a law and technology journalist who covered the trial in detail since it began, announced its conclusion in with this tweet:

法律和技術記者莎拉·鄭(Sarah Jeong)自試驗開始以來詳細介紹了該試驗，并在此推文中宣布了該試驗的結論：

Throughout the lawsuit, I haven’t been able to stop thinking about Oracle’s place in this classic collection of tech company organizational charts:

在整個訴訟中，我一直無法停止思考Oracle在這家經典的科技公司組織結構圖中的地位：

You’re probably asking, “OK. So one massive multinational corporation doesn’t need to give $9 billion to another massive multinational corporation. How is this a win for me as a developer?”

您可能會問，“好吧。 因此，一家大型跨國公司無需向另一家大型跨國公司捐款90億美元。 作為開發人員，這對我來說是一個勝利嗎？”

Well, if you’re developing software — or plan to in the future — this means that Google’s lawyers just steered you around a massive intellectual property minefield. They were able to prevent Oracle from setting a dangerous precedent: that a company could successfully sue you for writing your own functionally similar implementation of their APIs.

好吧，如果您正在開發軟件(或計劃在將來進行開發)，則意味著Google的律師帶領您進入了一個龐大的知識產權雷區。 他們能夠阻止Oracle設定危險的先例：公司可以成功起訴您編寫自己的功能上相似的API實現。

Unfortunately, the case isn’t closed yet. Oracle has vowed to appeal the decision yet again. And this ruling could still be overturned.

不幸的是，此案尚未結案。 Oracle誓言再次上訴該決定。 而且這項裁決仍可能被推翻。

Either way, the fact that Oracle was able to get so close to a verdict in their favor is pretty terrifying, and may embolden other companies that hold copyrights on APIs to start suing startups and open source projects, too.

無論哪種方式，Oracle都能夠如此接近他們的裁決是令人恐懼的事實，并且可能鼓舞其他擁有API版權的公司開始起訴初創公司和開源項目。

For example, a company called Micro Focus owns Unix, which among other things uses an API called POSIX. They could start suing developers who maintain versions of Linux and other Unix-compatible open source operating systems.

例如，一家名為Micro Focus的公司擁有Unix，該公司除其他外還使用一種稱為POSIX的API。 他們可能會開始起訴維護Linux和其他Unix兼容的開源操作系統版本的開發人員。

We’re not out of the woods yet, but all of us developers in the open source world — and the people who use our software — can breathe a momentary sigh of relief.

我們還沒有走出困境，但是開源世界中的所有開發人員以及使用我們軟件的人員都可以立即松一口氣。

If you have time, check out Sarah Jeong’s account of how absurd this trial was, and how disastrous an Oracle victory would have been for everyone but Oracle.

如果有時間的話，請查看Sarah Jeong的敘述 ，說這次審判多么荒謬，Oracle的勝利對除Oracle以外的所有人來說都是災難性的。

I only write about programming and technology. If you follow me on Twitter I won’t waste your time. ?

我只寫關于編程和技術的文章。 如果您在Twitter上關注我，我不會浪費您的時間。 ？

翻譯自: https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/why-todays-victory-over-oracle-matters-so-much-to-developers-4e24b4a368b5/

谷歌跟oracle