> If I as a human want to make a clean room reimplementation of some API or application, I must not have read the source code of the original implementation.
That is the difference between necessary and sufficient. Clean-room is sufficient to guarantee avoiding copyright, but it is not necessary. The line legally is south of there, but that position was chosen because they didn’t want to crossing and it was easier to argue for legally in court.
tl;dr: clean room is overkill for avoiding copyright infringement
It also mostly doesn't work, and even if it does work it's terribly expensive and time consuming enough to scare people off.
Go on, make a derivative of Mickey Mouse and sell it. See how it goes. Similar enough to be "compatible" (whatever that would mean in the animated cartoon space) but distinct enough not to run afoul of Disney lawyers. Then come back and tell us.
there are event exact measurements to take into account, for visual art, music etc. 'what is legally not stealing'.
Art, however, is a little different than code. code is a thing, but it also produces things.
It weirds me out there is a measure of code similarity but not a measure of if code is semantically the same. for example implementing a protocol could be done in many ways, but ultimately whats talked between clients/servers on the network is the same. so it's semantically the same despite being totally different code.
Considering all of Trump’s shenanigans it’s impressive it’s just that. With Hormuz, tariffs, and America first, this is the equivalent of a fender dent after spinning out on black ice.
We are of course still spinning, so I'm not overly confident we haven't just glanced off a guardrail on the way to the ditch (to belabour your analogy).
Given canada has so much oil,is the hormuz situation really a net negative for canada ecconomically? Like obviously its terrible in general, but id expect higher oil prices to help starve off a recesion.
Global market for oil. If the oil intensity of your economy is high, higher oil prices impacting all goods/services will outweigh increased oilel revenues.
Only if you insist on passing on global prices into your domestic economy. Not doing this is very difficult if you're a net importer but very much possible if you're a producer. This "leaves money on the table" but it is very much a choice (with different consequences), just one that rarely occurs to people who have grown up in highly capitalist economies.
This is also why historically companies have preferred being vertically integrated to avoid having their supply chains exposed until American economists and brokerages started pushing the cult of specialization. Outside of the US, big conglomerates still operate this way.
> Only if you insist on passing on global prices into your domestic economy. Not doing this is very difficult if you're a net importer but very much possible if you're a producer. This "leaves money on the table" but it is very much a choice (with different consequences), just one that rarely occurs to people who have grown up in highly capitalist economies.
They tried this before [0], and calling it controversial would be an understatement. Probably not a great idea to try it again right before the Alberta succession referendum [1].
Do Canadian industries use a large percentage of petroleum products refined from Canadian oil or is it refined from blends produced in other areas of the world, such as the United States and the Middle East?
Even without Trump, US-Canada trade was on track to hit choppy waters. Even in the Biden admin (whose alums would have ended up in a Harris admin) there was an openness to armtwist Canada [0] into acquiescing [1]. China did the same [2] with Canada [3][4] until they acquiesced [5]. Heck, even the EU has been slowrolling the ratification of the EU-Canada CETA [6] to protect their (primarily French and Italian) industry.
Sadly, it's difficult for a country that is Canada's size to push back when faced against these sized economies.
What’s funny is that Q1 per capita GDP growth in the U.S. was about 1.4% annualized (within the normal range) while Canada was only at 0.1%. Trump is the bull in the china shop but it’s not his China he’s breaking.
Much of the capex that was invested thanks to IRA and CHIPS subsidizes is starting to go operational and trade barriers enacted during both Trump 1 and the Biden admin remain in action, so it wasn't that surprising that much of the output that was unlocked from that era is continuing.
That said, tariffs and trade barriers did help. Heck, I'm a Dem but even I argued that we needed to build trade and non-trade barriers to protect capex that was unlocked via industrial policy.
Yep. That said, much of the stimulus and industrial support packages that were pushed thru in the Obama admin were thanks to the political cover Biden provided as Veep - he was Obama's senate whisperer.
That said, industrial policy has bipartisan support at this point now. As you know working DC BigLaw, professional networks are stronger than partisan biases.
During the AI layoffs they’ll be the first to go and we’ll be back to the always working bread winner dad. Not saying I like it, just saying that’s my read of the tea leaves.
> That's asking every company to prove a negative before rolling out new features.
That’s not as rediculous as it seems. That’s sort of model that drug manufacturers follow. It would also mean that if internally they see troubling behaviour they know they have to stop.
Practically, it would be corporate cover up. And applied earnestly it would make these businesses unviable.
reply