一场陪审团和法官看不懂的诉讼

甲骨文起诉Google侵犯Java API版权一案的困难在于法官和陪审团对技术细节并不十分理解1。他们听着一群科技界的资深人士努力以他们能理解的语言去描述技术术语,比如什么是API……2

Google前CEO Eric Schmidt尝试用电源插头的比喻去形容API和编程语言;Sun前CEO Jonathan Schwartz则尝试用餐馆的菜单去描述API,Jonathan Schwartz将API 比作菜单上的汉堡包,汉堡包的做法即是API的实现,两家不同餐馆的菜单都有汉堡,它们之间的竞争是关于哪一家的汉堡更好,而不是关于汉堡包这个术语。71岁的法官William Alsup不自在的回答,「我不知道证人刚才在说什么,有关早餐菜单的东西没有任何意义。」

对于法庭发生的这些场景,MotherBoard 记者 Sarah Jeong 在 In Oracle v. Google, a Nerd Subculture Is on Trial 这样写道:

Silicon Valley wants to live in a world of its own, where it sets its own rules and writes its own laws. And Oracle v. Google does little to change its mind that this is only right and fair. It’s why the tech community often lashes out with such vitriol at Larry Ellison over this suit: It’s a betrayal of nerd solidarity, Ellison selling them all out just to land a $9 billion punch right in Google’s face.