Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 7th May 2012 20:09 UTC
Legal There's some movement in the Oracle-Google lawsuit today, but it's rather difficult to determine just what kind of movement. The jury was told by the judge Alsup to assume APIs are copyrightable - something Alsup still has to determine later during trial - and with that in mind, the judge ruled Google violated Oracle's copyright on Java. However, the jury did not come to an agreement on a rather crucial question: whether or not it was fair use. All in all, a rather meaningless verdict at this point, since it's incomplete. Also, what kind of nonsense is it for a judge to tell a jury to assume something is illegal? Am I the only one who thinks that's just complete insanity?
Thread beginning with comment 517332
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Sigh. Thom.
by AdamW on Tue 8th May 2012 15:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Sigh. Thom."
AdamW
Member since:
2005-07-06

Put separately - what's crawled up my butt lately is simply the declining quality of the site. Sorry, but that's the truth. I guess instead of snarking I should just take it out of my RSS feed, really. I don't recall the last time I found out something interesting from OS News.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Sigh. Thom.
by MOS6510 on Tue 8th May 2012 17:50 in reply to "RE[2]: Sigh. Thom."
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

One could blame Thom for posting news (and adding a layer of bias) that can be found on x other sites, but on the other hand these articles seem to get a lot more attention from the readers than the non-mainstream ones.

Thus it seems Thom is providing what the majority of readers want, so in that regard he and his/this site are doing fine. For a job he doesn't get paid for he puts in a lot of time and effort.

It's not what you (and I) want to read and you (and I) long for the way this site was in the past, always hoping one day it will return to that state of joyfulness, but I my doubt is ever increasing.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Sigh. Thom.
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 8th May 2012 17:57 in reply to "RE[3]: Sigh. Thom."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Funny enough, you never complain when the bias is in Apple's favour. Funny how that works, eh ;) .

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Sigh. Thom.
by AdamW on Tue 8th May 2012 21:28 in reply to "RE[3]: Sigh. Thom."
AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

I think there's a kind of 'lag' effect. I'm more likely to comment on big controversial stories, but at the same time, I'm thinking 'man, I'm wasting time and effort on this'. And eventually I'll just cancel my subscription. Every so often I go through my feeds and do that. So the effect is kinda delayed, which makes it less obvious.

I'm less likely, actually, to comment an interesting story that teaches me something new than I am on an inaccurate story about something I already understand. After all, I have nothing useful to contribute on the first; but I do on the second. But I'm more likely to keep reading a site that posts the first than I am a site that posts the second. So I don't think 'number of comments' is a reliable proxy metric for 'value of site to readers', necessarily.

Reply Parent Score: 2