Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Three Judges to Review Java Ruling on Thursday

Posted by timothy on from the you-must-vs-you-ought dept.

Richard Finney writes " Reuter's Peter Kaplan is reporting that a three-judge panel in Richmond, Va. will hear arguments from Microsoft and Sun over whether it should uphold a Java 'must-carry' order imposed by a lower court judge in December. Here's a quick review of the issue: Microsoft signed an agreement with Sun on implementing Java. Microsoft implemented a non-compliant version ('embrace, extend, destroy' to their critics). Sun called them on it and as 'pushishment,' the courts said Microsoft had to carry the official Sun product for a while. Microsoft's lawyers seem to be on a winning streak lately and their spokesman Jim Dresler says the order is 'unprecedented, unnecessary and doesn't serve the public interest.' Some say this the deciding battle between Java and .NET. Too bad it's not being settled on the technical merits of both products."

2 of 29 comments (clear)

  1. This is a civil suit, not a technical suit. by bmetzler · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And don't forget, no matter what happens to Java and .Net, civil suits have never been settled on technical notes.

    -Brent

  2. Re:Define "Technical" by edward.virtually@pob · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What's really too bad is that the issue isn't being settled on the moral merits. Microsoft agreed to support Java while the DoJ case regarding Netscape was still alive for the PR value: "see, we're playing nicely with a competitor" and hopefully distracting people from the near daily testimony about the illegal methods [1] it used to destroy Netscape -- how it really plays with competitors. Microsoft has since used every legal and disputedly illegal means to avoid honoring the Java agreement, becoming bolder in its methods as the DoJ case dies [2]. The judge in the Java case was quite certain of his findings [3] and the remedy he proposed was extremely lenient given the damage Microsoft's behavior had on the cross platform viability and hence success of Java. Microsoft should not be able to escape this token punishment by appealing it until it wins.

    1. Jackson's Findings of Fact stands, only his remedy was overturned.
    2. First came the incompatible extensions and IDEs, then conflicting implementations, and lastly not shipping a JVM at all now that the DoJ case is circling the drain.
    3. Unlike Jackson, however, he kept his outrage in check. Doesn't seem to have made that much difference.