新闻采自国外著名IT社区slashdot
日前,Google拼音输入法涉嫌抄袭搜狗输入法的消息在业内引起了轩然大波.4月9日，Google中国正式就抄袭事件向用户、搜狐公司道歉.国外著名IT社区slashdot发布该消息之后,不少国外网友纷纷发表评论,以下是一些颇具代表性的阵营和不同的观点.

Google违背承诺，输入法没创新

1.Google这么做非常可悲，此次的抄袭行为违背了自己“不做恶”的承诺，Google在中国应该试着去适应当地的文化并且尊重中国的法律。拼音输入发在中国有很好的市场，但Google去做拼音输入法没有一点创新可言。

2.尽管他们(Google)只抄袭了部分的数据，但谁又知道他们其他的东西都是怎么来的。Google不小心露出了自己的真实面目，他们所有的工作真的那么具有“创造性”吗？

3.没看出Google的拼音输入法比其他的拼音输入法好多少，除了多了一个搜索按钮，它的性能不比微软的输入法高多少。

4.Google承认了抄袭行为，这是他们第一次这么干吗？也许不止这一次，只是我们以前没有听说罢了。


Google没错，没必要道歉

1.Google没有必要道歉，毕竟中国完全不像美国那样尊重版权和专利，而中国每天都在剽窃美国的知识产权。就算是Google抄了搜狐的数据，那搜狐的数据又是从哪里来的呢？

2.虽然Google有不少最顶尖的工程师，但这只限于美国，美国之外的Google员工会完全不顾道德的约束，而Google拼音输入法完全是由中国员工开发出来的。

3.Google员工中肯定出现了内奸，在搜狗推出搜狗输入法之前Google早就有此打算，并且已经开发出了词库，但Google的内奸把这个词库偷偷给了搜狗，所以很显然，是搜狗抄袭了Google。

4.中国遍地都是盗版软件，Google作为一家美国公司会抄袭中国的东西？这简直太讽刺了！


Google有责任，认错态度好

1.Google在犯下错误后很快删除了涉嫌抄袭的数据并向搜狐和用户道歉，这种态度很值得其他公司学习。

2.尽管Google违反了“不做恶”的承诺，但因为是抄袭的竞争对手的数据，情况至少还不至于很糟糕。

1.Google没有必要道歉，毕竟中国完全不像美国那样尊重版权和专利，而中国每天都在剽窃美国的知识产权。就算是Google抄了搜狐的数据，那搜狐的数据又是从哪里来的呢？

不解了?! 搜狗是搜狐其下的公司?

老外认真回的贴不抄，随口kuso倒转来了。

贴点长篇有意义的。
1）I've been thinking about this. Throwing the evilness of Google aside for a moment, why should someone be able to copyright a listing of the phonetic pronunciation of an alphabet?

Let's just imagine how I might create this list. I would have to hire people who spoke the Chinese. Then I would ask them to record the pronunciation of each character that they know. This is pretty easy because in Chinese each character has only one pronunciation (per dialect, anyway). There are about 3500 characters that you need to know in order to be literate. And all of these people would have learned these at school.

But how did they learn them? Well, they had a textbook and they memorized the list from the textbook.

Wait. I can't just memorize a list from one book and put it in another book. That's copyright infringement. In order for it not to be copyright infringement, I need to make sure that my sources all memorized the pronunciations from different sources. That's going to be difficult.

But let's say I do that. Now I have a list of the 3500 most common characters. And with that, I've probably got 99% of everything that's in a newspaper. But that's probably not good enough. I probably want a list
of say 60,000 characters. Otherwise it's pretty useless in a general sense. Uncommon characters are uncommon, but you *will* bump into the words over time.

So where do I find these characters? Can I hire some guy that knows them all? It would be very difficult. The best place to look is in a book. But wait... what am I going to do? Every time I find a character my people don't know, look it up in a book? Why don't I just copy it from the book in the first place? That's just copyright infringement again.

Really, the task of creating this list authoritatively without infringing copyright is monumental. Probably the *only* way to do it is with a community project where people just submit the pronunciations they know.

But if I'm going to have a community project like this, what the heck do I need copyright for? What am I protecting? If everyone is going to contribute, everyone should benefit.

So, personally, I don't think one should have copyright on this kind of material (same thing for spelling). It's just not in the public interest. This goes doubly so now that we have the internet and creating these kinds of projects is very inexpensive.

OK, I've gone on long enough... But one more rant. What's with this "do no evil" thing? Isn't that setting the bar a little low. If I told my parents that I'd work hard not to be evil, I think they'd be somewhat disappointed in me. If Google wanted to actually "do some good" rather than "do no evil", they could start a community project to collect this data and share it with the world.

Sigh... I guess we'll have to wait for some guy in his garage (but here's betting that someone has already started something).

2）Exactly. Reading 95% of the comments for this story and yesterday's story, everyone seems to think that this is about stealing code. This is about Google using the same data to train an algorithm. Both algorithms make the same mistakes because they were trained using the same data, which contained incorrectly labled information. It is whether or not this data was publicly available that is the issue.

For (a horribly contrived) example: Lets say that I write some hand writing recognition software using a neural-net. In order to train my software, I use a large database of handwriting samples that I have found on the web. However, the person that compiled this database made the mistake of labeling all of the sample images of the letter 'n' as the letter 'q', and all of the images of the letter 'q' are labeled as the letter 'n'. Person B comes along and uses the same data set to train a naïve-Bayes classifier. Guess what? Both algorithms will make the same mistakes when it comes to the letters 'n' and 'q'. Not because I stole code from Person B, but because we used the same training data.

I'm not defending Google at all here. If they stole the data from Sohu, they should get in trouble. Based on the fact that Google is in the web-mining business, I would guess that they just grabbed this data off of the net, and someone forgot to think about if they had the right to use it.

3）No, actually, "gook" is a term that originated in the Korean war for Korean people. Because many of the soldiers who fought in the Korean war were officers in the Vietnam war, their racial slurs were adopted and modified by a new generation, leading to great confusion about the origins of the term.

The etymology of the word gook is interesting, because it may be one of the few racial slurs that originated with a people's term for themselves. In Korean, guk means "country" and by extension a country's people; when it is not modified (cf. waiguk, outside country, foreigner) it is understood to be Korea or its peoples. Speakers of Chinese will recognize the word as having sintic origin (gúo, country, and wàigúo, foreign country, respectively, in Mandarin).

The term was appropriated by the Americans during the Korean war and used as a racial slur for Korean people in general, which must have been confusing to the Koreans (imagine someone using "American" as a slur for Americans to get an idea). Then, in Vietnam, the old "Asians are all the same" mentality prompted GIs to extend its meaning (imagine "American" being a racial slur for all white people, for example -- yes, I know many Americans aren't white, it's not a perfect analogy, deal with it).

可以说是旗下品牌.

3.Google员工中肯定出现了内奸，在搜狗推出搜狗输入法之前Google早就有此打算，并且已经开发出了词库，但Google的内奸把这个词库偷偷给了搜狗，所以很显然，是搜狗抄袭了Google。

:D