 




<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Oracle and Google have at it, as APIs go to court</title>
	<atom:link href="http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/soa-talk/oracle-and-google-have-at-it-as-apis-go-to-court/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/soa-talk/oracle-and-google-have-at-it-as-apis-go-to-court/</link>
	<description>A SearchSOA.com blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 15:27:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Jvaughan</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/soa-talk/oracle-and-google-have-at-it-as-apis-go-to-court/#comment-679</link>
		<dc:creator>Jvaughan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 15:27:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/soa-talk/oracle-and-google-have-at-it-as-apis-go-to-court/#comment-679</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Reader BillaBob writes us:

The issue is managed risk in an era of ambiguous IP ownership. By licensing I am pay indemnification insurance against the cost of suits or uncertainty surrounding use of derivative software containing the software that these days always originated elsewhere. I am less clear that software can’t/shouldn’t be copyrighted vs a more direct mechanism needed for compensating developers.  Is it a one-time fee, do all products have a limited life, is there a tiering mechanism?  Sending these matters to an antiquated court system for adjudication is absolutely broken and can only serve to muddy matters as judgments granted in one venue are reversed in others due to differences in understanding by judges struggling to interpret concepts of ownership that stretch the bounds of credulity.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Reader BillaBob writes us:</p>
<p>The issue is managed risk in an era of ambiguous IP ownership. By licensing I am pay indemnification insurance against the cost of suits or uncertainty surrounding use of derivative software containing the software that these days always originated elsewhere. I am less clear that software can’t/shouldn’t be copyrighted vs a more direct mechanism needed for compensating developers.  Is it a one-time fee, do all products have a limited life, is there a tiering mechanism?  Sending these matters to an antiquated court system for adjudication is absolutely broken and can only serve to muddy matters as judgments granted in one venue are reversed in others due to differences in understanding by judges struggling to interpret concepts of ownership that stretch the bounds of credulity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
