Connect with us

Tech

Supreme Court Justices Slam Google in Copyright Case That Could Break Up Their Tech Monopoly

The case, Google v. Oracle, has overarching ramifications.

Published

on

Google Ben Shapiro nazi

A key lawsuit that is currently playing out in the courts, Google v. Oracle, has the potential to break Google’s unethical corporate monopoly over the tech industry without major federal action.

Google has been accused of stealing over 11,000 lines of another firm’s code in order to develop its popular and lucrative Android operating system. Before Android, Google was not even in the top 100 American companies pertaining to revenue in 2010. After Android, Google is just outside of the top 10 American companies in terms of revenue today.

Google is accused of exploiting Java SE software that was programmed by Sun Microsystems in order to make their obscene profits. Sun agreed to grant a three-year license to Google for a total of $100 million, but Google did not want to pay the price to use their software. They allegedly decided to just steal it instead, arguing that it was not copyrightable. This is largely the basis of the lawsuit.

Trending: SICK: Reza Aslan Asks Dinesh D’Souza to Send Him His Address After Proclaiming “We Burn the Entire F****** Thing Down” If GOP Tried to Replace RBG

The case has made its way all the way up to the Supreme Court, and the various justices do not seem to be impressed with Google’s legal arguments as to why their alleged theft of the code was justified and proper.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

“I’m concerned that, under your argument, all computer code is at risk of losing protection,” Justice Alito said.

“Others have managed to innovate their way around it,” Justice Gorsuch said, adding that Apple and Microsoft have “been able to come up with phones that work just fine without engaging in this kind of copying [of Java].”

“You’re not allowed to copy a song just because it’s the only way to express that song. Why is that principle not at play here?” Justice Kavanaugh asked.

“Cracking the safe may be the only way to get the money that you want, but that doesn’t mean you can do it. I mean, if it’s the only way, the way for you to get it is to get a license,” Chief Justice Roberts said.

Former legislative leaders who worked on copyright law for decades have rejected Google’s flimsy arguments as well.

“Google argues that the computer coding it copied is not entitled to the protections of the Copyright Act. However, in my capacity as the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, chairman of the Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Competition and the Internet, and co-chairman of the Congressional Internet Caucus, I spearheaded the first comprehensive review of copyright law since the 1970s and oversaw numerous updates. On day one, it became evident that the Copyright Act clearly extends copyright protection to all “original works of authorship,” said former House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte.

“I was serving in the Senate when Congress adopted CONTU’s recommendations by passing the Computer Software Copyright Act of 1980. At the time, Congress did not carve out any subset of software from copyright protection. Indeed, CONTU actively considered whether some subset of computer programs should be carved out as uncopyrightable, and decided the answer was no,” former Senate Judiciary Chairman Orrin Hatch said.

Additionally, the Department of Justice under the Obama administration as well as the Trump administration have submitted friend-of-the-court briefs against Google. It is looking like the tech giant may end up losing this consequential lawsuit, which may cut Google down to size without substantial federal action.

Tech

Twitter Censors Former Obama Attorney General Eric Holder for Warning of Dangers about Mail-in Voting

Big Tech is out of control.

Published

on

Twitter has censored Obama-era attorney general Eric Holder for warning liberal Democrats against mail-in voting at this stage of the electoral race.

“It’s too late to use the mails,” Holder wrote in his shuttered tweet. “Given Supreme Court rulings I urge everyone to now vote in person; early vote or use drop boxes.”

Holder is referring to recent rulings in places like Wisconsin and Michigan, two battleground states where the Democrats were pushing for votes to be counted even if they were submitted by mail following election day. These rulings have made it significantly more difficult for Democrats to commit widespread voter fraud in those states.

“Protect your health but don’t let the Court and the deliberately crippled Postal Service deprive you of your most precious civil right. Plan your vote,” Holder added.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

In response to Holder’s plea to Democrats, Twitter limited the distribution of his tweet and provided the following warning: “Some or all of the content shared in this Tweet is disputed and might be misleading about how to participate in an election or another civic process.”

Left-wing journalist Michael Tracey, who has been a principled opponent to Big Brother censorship by Silicon Valley monopolies, pointed out how these corporate restrictions on free speech will inevitably hurt the liberals who are begging for it out of political expediency:

Big League Politics has reported on the many occasions that Twitter has censored President Trump for voicing concerns about the security of mail-in voting:

The social media giant Twitter is censoring President Donald Trump again, placing a warning on a tweet he published Sunday morning about the dangers of mail-in voting.

“So now the Democrats are using Mail Drop Boxes, which are a voter security disaster. Among other things, they make it possible for a person to vote multiple times. Also, who controls them, are they placed in Republican or Democrat areas? They are not Covid sanitized. A big fraud!” Trump wrote in his Tweet.

“This Tweet violated the Twitter Rules about civic and election integrity. However, Twitter has determined that it may be in the public’s interest for the Tweet to remain accessible,” Twitter wrote in their warning about Trump’s Tweet…

This is not the first time that the platform has censored Trump because of comments he made about mail-in voting. Twitter redirected users to establishment propaganda in favor of mail-in voting earlier this year after Trump made a post about its dangers…

While Twitter considers President Trump’s attempts to protect the integrity of the U.S. elections a violation of their terms of service, they allow pedophiles to discuss raping children on their platform.

If President Trump loses next week’s election, the Orwellian Nightmare becomes the new normal, and Democrat traitors will be responsible for ushering in this permanent dystopia.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending