Slashdot Mirror
Morfik Defends IP Rights Against Google
ReadWriteWeb writes "Today Morfik came out fighting in defense of its product JST (Javascript Synthesis Technology). Morfik has implied that Google infringed its IP by releasing Google Web Toolkit (GWT) a couple of weeks ago. The reason? GWT bore more than a casual resemblance to Morfik's JST, which allows developers to use a high-level language of choice and have it compiled to JavaScript. GWT is similar, being a Java-to-Javascript translator. These Javascript compiler products are increasingly necessary for companies like Google, with the high use of Ajax on today's Web and the associated complexity of programming in Javascript."
These Javascript compiler products are increasingly necessary for companies like Google, with the high use of Ajax on today's Web and the associated complexity of programming in Javascript.
There's no associated complexity with programming in JavaScript. There's lack of progress in the language (still no native support of ECMA4 in browser, shame that *Flash* comes with ECMA4 implementation in just two months, before browsers do).
JS synthesis is a hack anyway. I've seen the code produced by such technologies, and it's crap. You trust your application's well being to the compiler authors with the hope they update it when it breaks in the latest and greatest browser out there.
The correct way to me is upgrading the JavaScript language itself, and until then, using native JS libraries that can be readily reviewed and edited.
JS as a language isn't so primitive as to require a Java or C++ compiler to write good and clean code for it.
I know of several Highlevel-to-Lowlevel language translators (e.g. Java-toC, Oberon-to-C, you name it) that have been around for decades. Surely, you cannot get a patent for doing the same thing with a different language, can you. Can you?!?
Compiling something to JavaScript in the browser environment is about as obvious as compiling to C on Unix. Case in point, here are a few other X-to-JavaScript compilers pulled off the top of my head: Python, Prolog, Oberon, etc. Seems pretty obvious to me. Not that that has ever prevented the US Patent Office from granting a patent, of course.
These guys may be gambling on being able to drag this case out to SCO's epic proportions
How easily we trust the news today.
What if I tell you that there's no "case", Morfik doesn't threaten Google with case, Morfik didn't even mention to have claims against Google's kit, and it's all a speculation created by an overly eager reporter who tried to read between the lines in one of Morfik's press releases?
Ok, is this IP infringement? Nobody knows!
Did Google had a close look at Morfik's technology? Yes!
Does GWT looks a lot like what Morfik has done? Having used Morfik WebOS ApsBuilder for a couple of months, and given the GWT demos and description: definitely YES!
And please keep in mind Morfik's tool has A LOT more nice things! It is like Visual Studio and like Borland Delphi but for the Web, i.e. true RAD development invironment! And yes, it supports not just Java, but c#, Pascal and VB. It can target both Linux and Windows WebServers. Go see yoursef!
Sto
As Thomas Jefferson so nicely put it: "He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lites his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me."
In the letter of 1813 where this passage appears, Jefferson expresses some skepticism about the general utility of patents:
"Accordingly, it is a fact, as far as I am informed, that England was, until we copied her, the only country on earth which ever, by a general law, gave a legal right to the exclusive use of an idea. In some other countries it is sometimes done, in a great case, and by a special and personal act, but, generally speaking, other nations have thought that these monopolies produce more embarrassment than advantage to society; and it may be observed that the nations which refuse monopolies of invention, are as fruitful as England in new and useful devices."
In fact -- though it was little appreciated at the time -- a burst of invention now called the Industrial Revolution was already well under way in England, Scotland, and Wales.
The specific role of patents in this revolution is open to debate. But it's quite clear that, during that time, Great Britain led the world in the invention of "new and useful devices". When Jefferson claims otherwise, he is completely and totally wrong.
Actually, the grandparent poster has a point. Javascript is a dynamically typed language that makes liberal use of high level functions in more complex scripts. Due to Javascript's fluid nature, it would be difficult for a largely static language like Java to match it exactly. For instance, a class in Javascript is merely a function that dynamically constructs an object. One could roughly map a Java class to a Javascript function, but it would be difficult to the inverse. Java's rigid structure would be disadvantageous in this case.
Of course, one could just map the Javascript directly to a class file, and I believe Rhino does just that. However, that's not quite what the gransparent said, and even Rhino doesn't allow a flawless mapping from a Javascript class to a Java one (at least to the best of my knowledge). Classes in Java are just too static to entirely accomodate the more fluid Javascript object builder functions.
Eight years ago I attended a web conference (at the Infomart in Dallas) about a company that developed a "dual interface" IDE for Java. It let you deploy to traditional GUI clients and web clients. Of course, everybody hated Swing (Or was it AWT at the time.. not sure) but the jist of this is...
They did generate Javascript code from your Java code.
Not 100% directly - but it was there for special cases.
Anyway, it's a lame technology anyway - it seems more akin to a "meta" language and won't buy most people productivity gains because they are a "one off" project anyway that doesn't get a lot of iterative development.
I said no... but I missed and it came out yes.