Slashdot Mirror


The Case For Oracle

An anonymous reader writes "In a lucid writeup, InfoWorld's Neil McAllister takes a different angle on the Oracle-Google lawsuit, giving an explanation why Oracle was right to sue Google. McAllister argues that Google is splintering the Java platform, just like Microsoft was doing back in the 90s, and should be held up to the same standards. He further cites Google's Josh Bloch calling for Oracle to take a lead role in steering Java, concluding that Bloch maybe 'should have been more careful what he wished for.'"

24 of 341 comments (clear)

  1. If they can do it to Google, they can do it to you by ciaran_o_riordan · · Score: 4, Informative

    Problem is, if they can do it to Google, they can do it to any distributor of a free software JVM.

    To be safe, you have to either follow the Java Language Specification exactly (no subsets or supersets), or build your software on the OpenJDK software that Oracle distributes under GPLv2. Here's what info swpat.org has gathered so far about this case and its implications:

  2. Re:I think Google should solve this the easy way by KarmaMB84 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't know why anyone ever suggests this. It would be suicide for Google. The moment they revealed they would even consider blocking search terms in retaliation for anything they're no longer trustworthy as a search engine.

  3. Not remotely similar to the Microsoft situation by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Google isn't advertising Android as a Java platform. It's a platform that you can write code for in the Java language, yes, but this is a world away from claiming you're shipping "Java", and virtually no end users are under the impression Java has anything to do with the Java platform. Be very clear about this: no applications shipped as .jar (or .class) files for J2ME, J2SE, or J2EE, will run under Android, and nobody thinks they will.

    By comparison, Microsoft was shipping a supposedly compliant, but actually semi-incompatable, JVM with Windows that gave users and developers the idea it was a full implementation, which caused programs supposedly written for Java to often fail if either written for the Microsoft JVM and run under a standard stack, or vice versa.

    If this is the crux of the author's argument, he's an idiot. If Google is "fragmenting" Java by allowing you to write programs in the language for its platform, then I suppose every operating system author, from Microsoft to Commodore, has been "fragmenting" Unix by allowing you to write code in C for their non-Unix operating systems.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    1. Re:Not remotely similar to the Microsoft situation by SilentMobius · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Which is why Google _don't_ call it a java platform. It's dalvik, it runs dalvik bytecode on a dalvik VM. You can write in any high level language you like as long as you have a compiler that results in dalvik bytecode.

      As a convenience, Google provide a java->dalvik bytecode compiler, which is nice of them, but they don't ship a JVM nor a java system.

      --
      Loop, twist and loop again.
    2. Re:Not remotely similar to the Microsoft situation by diegocg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What Google has opted to do damages Oracle's trademark by referring to non-compatible software as Java language.

      Oracle disagrees with you. They aren't suing Google because of some trademark issue, they are doing it because of patent infringement. And the patents are more about the dalvik VM than about Java itself - .NET probably infringes those patents too, but Oracle probably won't take Microsoft to court.

      And there is nothing wrong with "forking" Java. What's the problem with the Dalvik VM and the Harmony classes? Maybe it can replace Oracle's Java in the embedded market? Well, I think that's better than letting C# kill Java, like Sun has been doing in the last years.

    3. Re:Not remotely similar to the Microsoft situation by ADRA · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Firstly, on a strictly legal sense, they're suing over Patents and Copyrights. The copyright route seems rather fishy, and I wouldn't be surprised if this argument gets dropped later. The patent suit is like all others, and has little if anything to do with the spirit of java, etc..

      On a philosophical sense, Oracle is correct. Android may never claim to be Java, but anyone who isn't a retard knows that Google is enticing Java developers into their pseudo-compatible platforms. From a personal perspective, it is annoying porting existing java apps into AppEngine / Android. The standard class libs limitations make interoperability between stock java and Google's platforms more difficult. This IS similar to the tack that Microsoft made proprietary core feature additions. Microsoft was never forced to use Java when coming up with their proprietary JVM. They chose java because it had buzz, and they assumed it would be next good language to assimilate and conquer. I don't think Google wants to kill Java, but I think they want to steal the large pool of existing Java developers and coerce them to use their platforms. Does this diversity hurt java (the language) in the end? Yes. Much of the advantage of java is in the rich set of additions built upon existing platforms. If those libraries now have to choose which platform to track against, it means two versions of common libraries, and smaller guys may just not bother to support J2SE,Android,AppEngine,GWT, etc...

      --
      Bye!
    4. Re:Not remotely similar to the Microsoft situation by boxwood · · Score: 4, Interesting

      or Dalvik?

      Actually you never see Google say "Java" without it being immediately followed by either "Programming Language" or "Language Compiler". Anytime there's mention of "virtual machine" its always immediately preceded by "Dalvik".

      I'm not an expert on trademark law, but I'm sure Google has checked with people who are, so it seems that saying "Android has Java" would be a violation, but saying "Android has Dalvik which uses the Java programming language" is not.

      But I guess thats for the courts to decide.

  4. What the hell is he talking about? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    McAllister argues that Google is splintering the Java platform, just like Microsoft was doing back in the 90s, and should be held up to the same standards.

    What the hell does that mean? Microsoft got sued because it failed to live up to a contract (huge surprise there.) There are no contractual issues here, so far as I'm aware (if I'm wrong someone please correct me.)

    Java isn't some religious manuscript that needs to be kept "pure" so the true believers won't rise up and slay those who would adulterate it. It's a goddamn PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE. If Oracle is suing Google, it has nothing whatsoever to do with Java being held to some standard (I could believe that of Sun, who held a certain vision for their progeny and a justifiable pride in their work) but is part of a some strategic plan. Matter of fact, that was Sun's strategy: keep Java consistent across all platforms so that "write once, run anywhere" would work. Do you really think that is a part of Oracle's planning? Is it even of the slightest concern?

    Larry Ellison is a lot of things (I've heard appellations such as "real son of a bitch", "bastard", and "prick" applied to him on a regular basis) but he's not exactly a visionary. This is about money and access to specific markets, and trying to spin it as being about the welfare of the Java programming language is ridiculous. If I were a real conspiracy theorist I would have to wonder if one of Google's real competitors in the advertising space were behind this, but I'm not. I leave that to other posters.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  5. MOD PARENT UP PLEASE by WindBourne · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wish that I had mod points left. I would modded you up. The fact is, that if Google were to do what the GP did, well, that would make them JUST LIKE MS. That is why MS was sued, and lost. The last thing that Google needs to do is something that stupid. It helps in the short term, but kills in the long.

    However, Google does not have to help Oracle either. And if I were Google, I would start exploring, along with the other phone companies, another VM. And let it slip that they are now exploring a different route for ALL OF THE SMART PHONES AND PHONES. At that point, Oracle will become VERY concerned about the idea of losing that market. Sun had the same issue. Wanted to make LOTS of money, and they were not content to simply control it as well as be the top money maker. They wanted the largest profits possible in the shortest time. That approach is what Oracle is doing.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:MOD PARENT UP PLEASE by kripkenstein · · Score: 4, Interesting

      However, using another language will present all kinds of issues - which language do they use?

      Why not JavaScript? It's extremely well-known, Google already has an excellent implementation (V8), and it is free of licensing worries.

      WebOS went that route, I'm surprised Google didn't, especially given that Google's livelihood is the Web.

  6. It's not just theirs, it's also ours by ciaran_o_riordan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have to disagree.

    The people who learn and write Java are humans. Writing Java is part of their life and they have a right to continue doing it.

    Much like culture. I think copyright should be limited to 10 years because it's not only *their* music, it's also *my* music. It's my childhood, and it's my culture. I want to re-live it whenever I choose, and I want to pass it on to friends and family if and when I choose.

    Java would have no value if people didn't use it. When people use it, they're investing themselves in it. Java's value thus comes from the users, not only from Sun/Oracle, so the users should have rights to use that thing they contributed to.

  7. Dalvik is not a Java VM by liloldme · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I stopped reading right where it said Dalvik is Java based. It doesn't even run Java byte codes...

    Is it a requirement for a tech reporter to be completely clueless? Is not doing basic research part of the job requirement?

    Following this logic Google Web Toolkit is "Java-based" too. Nevermind that the whole thing compiles to HTML and JavaScript.

    Just because Google provides language bindings in Java (and is able to cross-compile the Java class libraries to another runtime), does not make Dalvik runtime "Java-based". It does mean Google is able to leverage existing developer base on their new platform though. Smart move.

    What's next, Oracle going to sue GCJ for compiling Java to native?

    1. Re:Dalvik is not a Java VM by Hast · · Score: 4, Funny

      Is it a requirement for a tech reporter to be completely clueless?

      No; but it helps.

    2. Re:Dalvik is not a Java VM by Haxamanish · · Score: 4, Informative
      From wikipedia:

      Specifically the patent infringement claim references 7 patents including US Patent No. 5966702 "Method And Apparatus For Preprocessing And Packaging Class Files", and US Patent No. 6910205 "Interpreting Functions Utilizing A Hybrid Of Virtual And Native Machine Instructions".[15] It also references US Patent No. RE38104 "Method And Apparatus For Resolving Data References In Generated Code" authored by James Gosling [...]

      As I understand it (disclaimer: I'm a philosopher in Belgium), not using Java on Android would not solve the problem, since Oracle is attacking the Dalvik VM. So, even if it were running JavaScript, Python, Go or C#, Dalvik would according to Oracle violate the Java VM Patents.

      Solutions would thus be:
      - Prove those patents are not applicable to Dalvik
      - Find prior art to invalidate the patents (any lawyer-hacker who is familiar with, say, the inner workings of UCSD Pascal?)
      - Reform the US patent system, the most drastic reform would be the abolishment of all "intellectual property"
      - Move out of the US
      - Pay Oracle or make another deal with them like swapping some patents and/or technologies

  8. Re:By this logic SCO was right by boxwood · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They don't offer the embedded version of java for free. And there are a lot of requirements to to get the patent exemptions, ie. cannot implement a subset or a superset of the features in Sun's VM.

    Google basically just wanted to implement a language that a lot of developers were familiar with. Pretty much all the developers of phone apps were familiar with Java, so they implemented a VM similar to Java.

    Java has some similarities to the C++ syntax. They made the Java syntax similar to the C++ syntax because developers were familiar with it. Same goes for C#. If someone owned some patents on C++, should they be allowed to sue Oracle and MS?

    This does not bode well for makers of software development tools. By saying Oracle is allowed to sue anyone for making anything similar to Java means that no one can make a language with similar syntax to Java, and they can't implement libraries similar to Java's. So everyone has to check with a lawyer before they make software tools now. And that may not be enough since I'm sure Google did check with there lawyers while developing Dalvik, and made their best effort to build it so as not to infringe on patents. And they're still getting sued. What hope does anyone else have?

    I know I'm going to steer clear of Java from now on. .Net and Mono seem much safer than Java at this point. At least MS hasn't sued anyone for implementing libraries too similar to what they've implemented.

  9. wrong by yyxx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Face the truth why didn't Google use a full implementation of java as they are required by the patent grants. Because they wanted people to write for there platform and not simply port software.

    Google didn't use a "full implementation of Java" because J2SE is extremely bloated and unsuitable for mobile phone use. And they couldn't use Sun's implementation because that wasn't even open sourced when they started. J2ME doesn't have a patent grant, so making a cleanroom implementation of that wouldn't have helped them either.

    Of course, Google didn't use "an implementation of Java" at all, they implemented something completely different that happens to use Java syntax. Oracle's lawsuit is not based on the parts that Android happens to share with Java, because those are not covered by any patents.

  10. Re:The danger of Google by Cyberax · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "While I like to feel that Google is somehow better than Microsoft in all ways, I know this is clearly not true. The problem I do have with Google and their Java VM is that they aren't really contributing back to the core Java platform"

    And how can they do it? JCP is dysfunctional, just look how long it takes to release JDK7. And there are other even more blatant examples:

    What else? Google has written a lot of splendid Java libraries (like http://code.google.com/p/google-collections/ ). Sun/Oracle are free to take and integrate them into the JDK - they did this with Xerces and other libraries.

    But they won't do this. Why? Because Java is dead. For example, a request to add Multimaps was filed in 1998 and is still open: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4155149 Sun can't be bothered to take one of available Multimap implementations and add it to the core JDK.

    "In many way what Oracle should be pushing for is:
        - getting Google to use the standard Java byte code"

    What for? To make devices run slower?

    " - working with Oracle to contribute their work back to the core"

    Contribute back what? Android implements core libraries very faithfully.

  11. Re:I think Oracle is right by gbjbaanb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    not quite. Java - mobile edition - is not free and open at all. They opened up the 'legacy' Java and kept the 'future' java for all the juicy licencing cash they expected to get. Quite a sensible move as it turns out, as there's lots of money to be made in mobile computing, far more than you get flogging licences to Enterprise app developers.

    Still, its their language, VM, patents and copyright. You (and Google) never had to use it, but if you do, you have to play by their rules. So although I'm a fan of Google and what they've done, I think their manipulation of Oracle's rules on the use of Java isn't as decent and honest as I'd expect.

    And yes, I'm sure it'll end up with Google dumping Java and making their own language (G# perhaps, or something truly open like Python and C)

  12. Re:If they can do it to Google, they can do it to by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    To be safe, you have to either follow the Java Language Specification exactly (no subsets or supersets),

    Not quite. Supersets are allowed, but only if they do not add anything in the java namespace. For example, you can add a new google.Array class, but you can't add methods to the Array class in the java namespace. The point of this is so that people developing Java applications can assume that anything in the java.* classes on their platform will work on any other platform.

    The problem with Android is that it does implement a load of the java.* namespace, but it is not a complete implementation. This means that code written using portable Java will not always work on Android. I don't think they add anything in the java.* namespace, so you can port apps from android unless they use the android.* stuff.

    This is actually the opposite of what Microsoft did. They added stuff in the java.* namespace, so developers would write apps with J++ that they expected to be portable, but which weren't.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  13. Re:I think Oracle is right by oiron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Trademark: irrelevant as long as Google doesn't call it Java

    Copyright: irrelevant as long as Google doesn't use Java code (or infringe other material published under copyright)

    Patents: well, that's what Oracle's suing about; the veracity of their claims is yet to be demonstrated

  14. "Owning" a language is preposterous by KonoWatakushi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The purpose of a language is communication, and what Oracle is doing here is no different than censorship. The Java language by itself is completely worthless--its value is entirely derived from the people who express their ideas through it. Why should Oracle have free rein to control their work?

    Targeting Dalvik (which is not a JVM) on an Anrdoid phone is no different than compiling Java with GCJ. If people want to run their code on a different platform, why should Oracle have any right to stop them?

    The reality is that they don't. In the end, this is about the abuse of software patents, and you can't support Oracle here without supporting software patents. However you feel about Google, it isn't right to be cheering for a patent troll.

  15. Re:If they can do it to Google, they can do it to by DrXym · · Score: 4, Informative
    The problem with Android is that it does implement a load of the java.* namespace, but it is not a complete implementation. This means that code written using portable Java will not always work on Android. I don't think they add anything in the java.* namespace, so you can port apps from android unless they use the android.* stuff.

    That isn't the problem at all. Android / Dalvik has never claimed to be an implementation of Java so its irrelevant how much or how little of the standard namespace it has implemented. It could have implemented all 100% and Oracle would still be pissed.

    The reason why they're pissed is because Google chose to deliberately make a Java-like environment, one which benefited from the Java programming language but wasn't actually Java and never claimed to be. Therefore it was not subject to Oracle's licensing terms or directional interference. Since Google never claimed it was Java (as did Microsoft when they produced a bastardized version), Oracle cannot sue for licence or trademark infringement.

    All they can do as they have done is rummage around for some patents that were violated in the process. The patents look pretty weak, and some of them don't even cover Android OS, just the SDK. I think what is likely to happen is that Google will vigourously defend the suit and issue a counter suit, but they won't settle for anything less than a sop to Oracle. Perhaps that sop will be to fold JavaFX into the SDK or something. I actually like JavaFX and it would be a good fit and would bring Oracle back in the game to some extent. What I absolutely don't see happening ever is Google using Java ME or dumping Dalvik.

    IMO Oracle / Sun really have themselves to blame for this. Java devs love Java but they despise the glacial pace of development. Java 7 is years overdue and Java ME is stale technology, inadequate for most of the purposes it was touted for. The average STB, or smart phone has outgrown Java ME. I do not blame Google for not waiting around for Oracle's blessing and doing their own thing.

  16. Re:If they can do it to Google, they can do it to by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

    That isn't the problem at all. Android / Dalvik has never claimed to be an implementation of Java so its irrelevant how much or how little of the standard namespace it has implemented

    Incorrect. Sun / Oracle licenses all of the patents in the lawsuit, for free, for use in complete implementations of the Java platform. The fact that Android / Dalvik is not a complete implementation of the Java platform is precisely the problem because it means that they are not covered by the patent grant. If it were, then the lawsuit would not exist.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  17. Re:The danger of Google by devent · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm sorry, but for what purpose you need a Multimap in the core of Java? I'm using Java now for 4 years and I never needed a Multimap. And if you need a Multimap, why not include some third library? You properly need a whole bunch of third party libraries anyway, like you need with any language.

    I think that's the big reason that Java is so much used in the enterprise, because the core is rock solid and there are a whole ecosystem of free and open source enterprise ready libraries. I had used C# as well and I just cannot understand why you need so much bloat in the core of the language, which changes anyway with the major versions of it. Properties are just bloat, operator overloading is just bloat, structs are bloat and so on. If you need such things just take Scala, Groovy, JPython, etc. That's why I really like Java. The core language is rock stable and very easy to use with tools like Eclipse and Maven. But if you need the extras, just take Groovy, JPython, JRuby, Scala, Clojure, JavaScript, etc.

    Now I really wish that Oracle would make this things better: Desktop Java, and "Internet Java". Because to write a desktop application in Java is like a developers dream and it runs with the same speed as a native application. As a bonus you get platform independence. I take a Java application anytime over a native application, for one reason: you just download the JAR file and it runs. In the "Internet Java" there is so much potential and it's criminal from Sun to not became the market leader for internet applications written in Java. That was a catastrophic management failure. Java Web Start applications are a dream. You just click on a link and in few seconds you get a fully functional application. Now of course everything is Flash, but if Sun would have had a better management they could have been the market leader.

    What I really hope is that the open source community around Java finally takes the lead and cut any ties off to Oracle. What the open source community can do you can see with Groovy, Scala and Clojure and the other languages around Java. But they need to have a leader, like Linus with the Linux kernel, to not fragmentize the Java platform. I really with that this lawsuit is a wake up call to the community. The Java platform is under the GPL, now take it and make it the number one in desktops and in the internet. The potential is there. There is an open source enterprise ready virtuel machine with a rich core library and a more richer open source ecosystem around it. The patents are only valid in the USA so screw Oracle and any other American patent troll company.

    Please, someone in Europe, India or in China (anywhere where there are no patents threads), take the Java technology and make it the next Linux kernel. The potential is there. It's open source and it works.

    --
    http://www.mueller-public.de - My site http://www.anr-institute.com/ - Advanced Natural Research Institute