The Google lawyer should be fired. I can’t believe you’d put the best of the best in front of the SC and the guy didn’t even sound like he could describe what an API actually is in non-technical terms. I don’t see how he represented the best legal representation Google could buy.
Indeed. This was bad representation to the point that I'm wondering if it was intentional. Google might have recently realized that, as a monopoly, fighting for API freedom perhaps isn't in their best interest.
He also argued that there was only one way Oracle's Java libraries could have been designed, which is clearly false, and the justices picked up on that.
His claim that there is no creativity involved in designing an API is plainly absurd as well, and from the transcript I don't think the justices bought that at all. And I agree with the Justice Department lawyer that the "no other way to do it" argument he pushed at the beginning is circular.
How do you know the Google lawyer isn't representing the wishes of his client? A little voice in the back of my head wonders if maybe google's position has changed over the years...
Google... really isn't that good at what they do besides sell Ads. They're just big so whatever they choose becomes the standard because 'doing what google does' not only won't generally get you fired but also impresses people who don't actually have to build difficult things. It's a testament to the power of an entrenched market position.
