Slashdot Mirror


Judge to Oracle: A High Schooler Could Write rangeCheck

mikejuk writes with an update on the Oracle vs Google Trial. From the article: "One month into the Oracle v Google trial, Judge William Alsup has revealed that he has, and still does, write code. Will this affect the outcome? I think so! After trying to establish that the nine lines in rangeCheck that were copied saved Google time in getting Android to market the lawyer making the case is interrupted by the judge which indicates he at least does understand how straightforward it would be to program rangeCheck from scratch: 'rangeCheck! All it does is make sure the numbers you're inputting are within a range, and gives them some sort of exceptional treatment. That witness, when he said a high school student could do it — ' And the lawyer reveals he doesn't: 'I'm not an expert on Java — this is my second case on Java, but I'm not an expert, and I probably couldn't program that in six months.' Perhaps every judge should be a coding judge — it must make the law seem a lot simpler..." From yesterday; the Oracle lawyer was attempting to argue that Google profited by stealing rangeCheck since it allowed them to get to market faster than they would have had they wrote it from scratch. Groklaw, continuing its detailed coverage as always, has the motions filed today.

17 of 478 comments (clear)

  1. 5 Seconds by Githaron · · Score: 5, Funny

    From yesterday; the Oracle lawyer was attempting to argue that Google profited by stealing rangeCheck since it allowed them to get to market faster than they would have had they wrote it from scratch.

    Because 5 seconds make all the difference.

    1. Re:5 Seconds by SailorOrion · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, if you are flying at orbital speeds because you have the nose up there, it's about 40km of difference...

    2. Re:5 Seconds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      5 seconds? I'd say 5-10 minutes. Searching for that algorithm probably would take a lot longer than coding it...

      ...you ARE aware who the defendant in this case is, right?

  2. Re:A high schooler? by Soilworker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For those interested: (from http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3940683)

    From OpenJDK:
    private static void rangeCheck(int arrayLen, int fromIndex, int toIndex) {
                    if (fromIndex > toIndex)

                            throw new IllegalArgumentException("fromIndex(" + fromIndex +
                                                  ") > toIndex(" + toIndex+")");

                    if (fromIndex arrayLen)
                            throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(toIndex);

            }
    From Google:
    private static void rangeCheck(int arrayLen, int fromIndex, int toIndex) {
                    if (fromIndex > toIndex)
                            throw new IllegalArgumentException("fromIndex(" + fromIndex +
                                                  ") > toIndex(" + toIndex+")");

                    if (fromIndex arrayLen)
                            throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(toIndex);

            }
    }

  3. English as a second language summary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Reading that summary made me feel like I was taking crazy pills. So many mixed tenses. Could someone clean that shit up for readability?

  4. Re:A high schooler? by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Fore chrissakes, anyone who has been writing any degree of code for more than a few years has implemented a range check function, and whatever the language C, C++, Java, C#, BASIC, 80x86 assembler, they all basically look the same. If this is truly what Oracle's case boils down to, then they literally have nothing, and this comes out looking no different than what SCO's claims against Linux ended up being. It's fucking ludicrous. To claim that somehow a nine line range check function gave Google some vast market edge to my mind breaks credibility. I'm guessing this is pointing pretty heavily towards Oracle being handed their balls on a platter over this.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  5. Re:A high schooler? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 5, Informative

    It is an exact 1:1 copy. Google is screwed.

    Of course it's an exact 1:1 copy - the guy who wrote it gave it to both Sun AND Android. And if you've been following the trial, Sun never registered a copyright on that specific function.

    Oracle is *SO* screwed.

    --
    Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
  6. Contest by Chemisor · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ok, let's have a contest. Gather a bunch of high schoolers who have some idea how to program in Java, give them the spec for rangeCheck, and see how long it takes them to write it. The winner takes the prize equal to the damages Oracle is asking for. Bonus points if completed in less than 15 minutes.

  7. Re:A high schooler? by bistromath007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No. Not even a little.

    If the judge's statement is even a half-truth, the code in question checks a number, and passes it somewhere if it's a good number.

    That is what all goddamn code does. A dumb American high schooler could accomplish that in about twenty minutes if you refused to let them leave until they did, because if you aren't doing that, you haven't written a program! A seven year old could probably do it faster; they haven't "learned" yet that they're dumb.

    The lawyer is a disingenuous jackass who assumed that the judge, like him, would see a piece of code and assume it's an arcane fucking ritual without even trying to parse it. He deserves derision.

  8. Re:A high schooler? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not being able to write code doesn't mean you're stupid.

    However, equating them means you're ignorant and arrogant.

  9. "I probably couldn't program that in six months." by ibic00 · · Score: 5, Funny

    A truly exceptional lawyer.

  10. The juicy bits by RemyBR · · Score: 5, Informative

    For those of you who don't want to read all the transcript, this is what the judge said:

    Oracle: I think the law with respect to infringer's profits, rather than damages, only requires us to show that there was a product that contained infringing material and that the product produced revenue, and then the burden shifts to the other side. If I'm wrong about that, I still think it's possible to demonstrate a nexus by showing that speed was very important to Google in getting Android out, and by copying they accelerated that.

    Judge: We heard the testimony of Mr. Bloch. I couldn't have told you the first thing about Java before this problem. I have done, and still do, a significant amount of programming in other languages. I've written blocks of code like rangeCheck a hundred times before. I could do it, you could do it. The idea that someone would copy that when they could do it themselves just as fast, it was an accident. There's no way you could say that was speeding them along to the marketplace. You're one of the best lawyers in America, how could you even make that kind of argument?

    Oracle: I want to come back to rangeCheck.

    Judge: rangeCheck! All it does is make sure the numbers you're inputting are within a range, and gives them some sort of exceptional treatment. That witness, when he said a high school student could do it--

  11. Re:A high schooler? by WaywardGeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oracle's lawyers are being brilliant at what most lawyers do well: make insanely stupid arguments in order to run their clock as long as possible. It's not about justice. It's about that new yacht Oracle's head lawyer is saving up for. Those nine lines of code might be worth only $20, but the lawyers are making a killing.

    --
    Celebrate failure, and then learn from it - Nolan Bushnell
  12. Re:A high schooler? by daniel78 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Google pretty much admitted it was copied - claiming it was accidental (the same guy wrote it for Oracle and later, Google). It has since been replaced. The jury - completely reasonably - found that it infringed. This is no longer in debate

    The question is whether it is worth anything.

    Google says no. Oracle's own expert witnesses said no. The judge - who has apparently revealed he is a programmer - says no. Oracle are arguing it's worth millions.

    Someone is desperate here, and its not Google

  13. Re:then why didn't they write it by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because to do it differently would be to make the code worse. Go to your local hardware store, and look at the hammers. Despite many different manufacturers, they all look and function basically the same. The reason why is because mankind worked out the most efficient hammer design a long time ago and there is nothing left to innovate there.

    Imagine how retarded competitor's hammers would have to be designed to get around a patent like the one Oracle is asserting here. This is why there is so much folly in patenting something so elementary, like 'slide to unlock', or a range check.

  14. Re:A high schooler? by jbengt · · Score: 5, Informative

    SCO had the same lawyer.

  15. Re:A high schooler? by hey! · · Score: 5, Interesting

    J2ME is a pretty feature-limited version of Java

    Well, having spent a number of years watching J2ME, I'd say the problem wasn't that J2ME was feature limited. I had things I could do even in MIDP that were quite useful, to say nothing of the Personal Basis Profile.

    As an early app developer, we had two concerns with J2ME: how to get our app in our users' hands, not getting tied to a particular carrier (and thus losing access to corporate customers who used different carriers) or even handset. You got your J2ME SDK from the handset vendor and the handset vendors were the mobile carriers' slaves. The same phone would have different capabilities on different carriers because they deleted features the carriers didn't want (for price positioning or because the features conflicted with the carriers' laughable ambitions to become content companies).

    When Apple came along with the iPhone, they did three important things. First, they didn't take any crap from the carrier (AT&T), they defined the product themselves. Second, they made it possible to run an app on any iOS device (originally just the iPhone, but later the iPod Touch too). Third, they had a simple mechanism for getting your app into the customer's hands. That made it possible to create a successful product for iOS in a way it had never been possible in J2ME.

    I believe the fact that it Apple made it easy to sell apps for iOS is what is responsible for the success of attracting developers to the platform early on. It wasn't some kind of Apple UI secret sauce, although touch screens standard was a big advance. J2ME could have been an entrenched mobile standard years before the iPhone came out, if Sun had only taken steps to create a market (not necessarily an app store) for developers to target.

    Then Android came along, and it was everything I'd ever hoped for: well thought out, robust, open source, feature-rich, vendor independent, even *app store* independent. But by then I was out of the business.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.