Slashdot Mirror
Oracle Claims Google 'Directly Copied' Our Java Code
itwbennett writes "On Wednesday, Oracle amended the lawsuit it filed against Google in August, saying that 'approximately one third of Android's Application Programmer Interface (API) packages' are 'derivative of Oracle's copyrighted Java API packages' and related documents. In particular, 'the infringed elements of Oracle America's copyrighted work include Java method and class names, definitions, organization, and parameters; the structure, organization and content of Java class libraries; and the content and organization of Java's documentation,' Oracle says. 'In at least several instances, Android computer program code also was directly copied from copyrighted Oracle America code,' Oracle alleges."
Fire up Patty at Grocklaw./.... this is identical to the IBM vs SCO case
I seem to remember that the SCO Group used the same arguments against Linux distributors and users. Perhaps Larry should check the performance of SCO stock before he makes another move.
Apparently they are getting really desperate and are behaving like SCO now. If you have tons of getters, setters and other small functions, it is easy to have the same implementation in all cases.
"The infringed elements of Oracle America’s copyrighted work include Java method and class names, definitions, organization, and parameters; the structure, organization and content of Java class libraries; and the content and organization of Java’s documentation," Oracle says.
All of this stuff should count as an interface, and therefore not covered by copyright under US law. If they win this, then it sets a very dangerous precedent. Any project that implements an interface defined by another would potentially be violating copyright - including every single PC, which includes a BIOS that implements the behaviour of the IBM-copyrighted PC BIOS. Projects like WINE and GNUstep would also be in serious trouble and Linux (implementing UNIX APIs) would be illegal.
Claiming that Google copied their code is interesting. I was under the impression that the java.* classes in Android came from Apache, not from the Sun releases. Is Oracle trying to pull a SCO here? (i.e. it does something like what our code does, therefore it's ours).
They really should have kept this as a patent / trademark issue. Bringing copyrights in is a terrible idea.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Oracle - how did Google get their hands on it in the first place?
Oracle makes Java unusable, by being Oracle.
As long as they provide sources for their Davlik JVM i would think they will be fine no?
The JDK that ships with Android is just a subset of Harmony, which is released under the Apache license. All improvements made by Google have been folded back into the project. The additional non-standard libraries they ship with android, are also opens source.
Larry Elison, to become the most hated man in the World.
What are you talking about? Android is open source under the apache license.
google used the package from apache harmony and the java.* package in android are open and free, so what exactly is your point ?
Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
n/t
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
10 INPUT "What is your query? ", U$
20 PRINT "Did you mean:"; U$
30 INPUT "Are you feeling lucky? ", N
40 PRINT "Goodbye "; U$
50 END
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Maybe there's more here. Maybe Google took actual, non-open Java code, but it looks a lot like the SCO suit to me. That Oracle is saying that using the same header files (AKA APIs) is infringement. We all know that to make a work-alike system, the strings in the header files (APIs) need to be the same. They really look the same, even if you create them from scratch by following the published specs.
This seems like Darl's work, all over again.
I want to start by saying I'm not making any commentary here on the validity of Oracle's claims regarding direct copying (I suspect they are making that claim just because class names and methods are the same for some classes, for compatibility purposes).
The thing is, Google doesn't claim Dalvik is "Java". They aren't using a Java license. Yes, you can create a free/open-source implementation of Java, as long as you are licensing from Sun/Oracle under the terms of the Java license.
Google created something very similar to Java, but they are not calling it Java, and do not claim to have licensed Java from Sun/Oracle. I believe they claim copyright over the entire Dalvik VM and API. That makes a world of difference, legally, and so they can't use the defense the parent is suggesting.
...consisting of Microsoft, Apple and Oracle.
I thought that Java was now under the GPL?
Oracle should never have been allowed to buy Sun. Instead it should have been liquidated (since that's what happening anyways... particularly with the high-profile Sun departures).
And so it begins...
Sorry but that is a fact that is independent of any hatred you may have of Oracle.
Renamed a string to s???? Why even bother?
Does the logic flow of the code need to be the same as well? This goes beyond interface interaction.
Suddenly, I feel the need to buy a t-shirt...
http://www.zazzle.com/obstacle_database_11g_tshirt-235492717886734808
Oracle should never have been allowed to buy Sun. Instead it should have been liquidated (since that's what happening anyways... particularly with the high-profile Sun departures).
Well then, you shouldn't have allowed it.
Anyone else thinking Oracle buying Sun was a calculated move to destroy Android by killing Java?
Maybe Google wanted Sun to die so Google could buy Java in a disheveled state....
Reeks of conspiracy, I know, just a thought...
Is Oracle trying to pull a SCO here?
Groklaw pointed out that David Boies is one of the three Lawyers listed on the Oracle filings. He also represented SCO in that fiasco, so, yes it appears we will be seeing the same sort of bullshit we saw there. He is a lawyer, and has represented many clients including some we would side with (such as arguing the DOJ's case against Microsoft). But his methods are similar regardless of the client; a no-holds-barred fight claiming anything they can think of regardless of the merit of the claims or how it affects Oracle's reputation with their customers.
So maybe this is why Apple decided to stop updating their java and leave it to Oracle...
"Don't meddle in the affairs of a patent dragon, for thou art tasty and good with ketchup." ~ohcrapitssteve
We all thought the problem would be MySQL!
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/20/128246&from=rss
Isn't oracles java just OpenJDK? Which is GPL, and thus can be copied in the way google did (if they did)?
Next up, Linus sues the world for each copy of the kernel sources?
has never been a good idea - the enforcement of Java on Google's Android platform has been often criticized and caused major headaches for developers and FOSS community.
This mess might make Google think twice about Java and might push them to embrace patent-free industry standards instead.
Google should buy PostreSql, jazz it up a bit, and use it to kill Oracle's root business.
Table-ized A.I.
Wow, Oracle is making themselves irrelevant in a hurry... do they really want to go out of business that bad? If I worked for them right now I'd be looking for another job asap. First MySQL, then OpenOffice, and now they are (simplified) attacking open legitimate use of Java? I know some higher-end vendors rely on Oracle still, but this is strike three in the case to move the heck off of anything Oracle.
OK so google buys up oracle stock,
holds a meeting and fires and replaces everyone and proceeds on like nothing happened, right?
Investors wanted their money back. If Sun dumped all their copyrighted works onto torrent networks with a GPL license and folded up shop, their stock price would have instantly tanked and investors lost every penny.
Such a leadership decision would have been so negligent with regards to fiduciary responsibility that the board likely would have faced personal criminal liability. Not to mention, anyone working at Sun who actually wanted to stay at the company would have lost their jobs.
It's easy to see the repercussions of the Sun sale affecting us all for years to come, but I don't think there was any other choice. Oracle was the last company I wanted to see get Sun's assets; but it is what is is.
You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
In most countries, when a company is liquidated, the various assets (including so called intellectual property assets) are being sold to the highest bidder. Imagine some crucial Unix-y stuff by SUN being bought by MSFT, SCO etc...!
cpghost at Cordula's Web.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20101005114201136
Google's answer with counterclaims. Like a declaration that the Oracle’s claims be barred by the doctrine of "unclean hands" (i.e. bad faith), and for Oracle to pay Google's attorney fees for that invalid lawsuit.
Evil? Are you serious? Oracle is not "evil", at least not by my understanding of the word. Evil would be to stealing food from a starving crowd, selling weapons to terrorists, secretly building atomic arsenals to launch surprise attacks, creating an ever-mutating virus targeting a specific ethnic group, and the like... A company buying another one and filing a lawsuit for a patent against a competitor might be silly, unfair, wrong... but never "evil".
Perhaps I'm trolling, perhaps I'm not.
Google should just buy Oracle, then it could develop OO etc to kill MS Office.
Oracle should never have been allowed to buy Sun. Instead it should have been liquidated (since that's what happening anyways... particularly with the high-profile Sun departures).
And so it begins...
So Oracle should have just been allowed to buy the Java patent/trademark/copyright portfolio without picking up the rest of the company? Seems we'd be in the same situation for even less money out of Larry's pocket.
Wow, Oracle is now officially a troll ... going the way of SCO ... fun for lawyers!
they're going to become another historical footnote of computer industry stupidity if they follow this path
Be quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to anger.
Java caught on quickly largely because it was open: the language specification was published without prohibiting 3rd parties from implementing it in their own VM, etc. Copyrighting the class library API, which is half of Oracle's charges here, is a severe lockdown. Oracle's grab to control more of Java than even Sun did is going to kill the spirit of the community that cares about openness which keeps Java alive.
Perhaps this move is why so many Sun Java people left suddenly in the past month or so. Or perhaps Oracle has even more greedy plans to own more of Java while shrinking it to an also-ran behind .Net (and its emerging Silverlight that will run everywhere Java does).
--
make install -not war
This may be as it is; but if Harmony was contaminated, so would be Android. Just using Free Software does not automatically guarantee that is was unencumbered. And maybe only by mistake (encumbered); that would not help at all.
And 'feeding back' into a community project is totally unrelated to the potential issue of copyright violation.
The last thing I'd like to do, was defending Oracle. But arguments need to be correct, complete, and relevant.
It seems that you didn't program in either one of those languages. Differences in programmers' productivity are BIG. There are many languages better than Java, but none of them match the developing/maintaining/testing/refactoring capabilities of java related tools. The only tools coming close to it are their .NET clones^H^H^H^H^Hcounterparts.
Isn't the code for Sun's standard java library GPL along with the rest of OpenJDK? If so, it should be completely legal to copy it as much as you want.
--Coder
Then again, so was Pystar v Apple. But that didn't appear to bother her.
File an injunction preventing Google from continued use of the code. Code was in use before Oracle took control of the code base, no damages are awarded.
Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
Yes, but, what Oracle is trying to lay the groundwork for in the courts is that Google's Android code is based on SUN's Java implementation directly. If they can prove that, then all the patents that Oracle inherited from SUN when they bought them out will come into play. From their perspective, whether or not the code is open sourced doesn't matter to them, they have some patents to troll now and they're going to jump out from under the bridge at everyone. Google is just the first that is going to go down for this if Oracle can convince the courts patents > open source.
This is bad news. And, it means everyone who is doing Java right now should start migrating away. Else face the music when Oracle comes a calling demanding you pay them or face them in court. That's assuming Google loses their case.
Also, Linux is now under attack by Microsoft, for more patent trolling. We may be seeing the end of open source as we know it. These companies have a lot of time, money and motive to completely wipe open source projects off the face of the Earth so people have to buy their own products.
*sad face*
I am both puzzled and worried by Oracle's motivation here. It sounds to me like Oracle is actually going to kill Java by making it impossible to adopt in the name of trying to leverage the (very expensive) IP they bought along with Sun.
Sounds like we need a new, and truly open, language and runtime for the 21st century.
XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
Makes me chuckle when I recall all those loud mouthed idiots here on Slashdot (and other online forums) chanting for US to boycott EU stuff because regulatory entities in the EU were not blindly saying yes to the Oracle/Sun deal. Yes, indeed, the acquisition of Sun by Oracle has turned out splendid!
There was a reason that open source, I mean closed source, java left a funny taste in my mouth. You're free to use it except when we say that you're not.
Here are the examples Oracle is using:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/oracle-says-google-directly-copied-java-code-heres-the-line-by-line-comparison/41025&usg=AFQjCNF1GNdD5_oXwawU7akdBGHETrf57w
http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=http://www.scribd.com/doc/40316099/orclgoogcode&usg=AFQjCNFFdZkReVLuVJIS7Xshk1X997VTIA
And a link to the original Sun implementation:
http://www.docjar.com/html/api/sun/security/provider/certpath/PolicyNodeImpl.java.html
We don't know all the facts... but it smells funny.
The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
It seems to me that most code targets a very small number of platforms--if you're developing for the desktop/laptop business market, then you need to target the PC. If the product is the desktop/laptop consumer market, then target the Mac and the PC. If you're targeting the embedded processor market, you probably have a pretty good idea of the hardware and software that it will run on. I guess the only currently fragmented market is the mobile phone market, wehre there is still no clear winner on the hardware, software and OS.
If there is a new processor/hardware... java will not just run on it... someone will have to port the VM.
On the desktop, Java is just annoying. Every few weeks the damn updater asks about a download. Between updating Java and Flash you can pretty much keep busy.
Clean room design will protect from copyright claims... but not patents.
This space for rent.
I don't know why buy I smell essence of SCO here.
There is no JDK that ships with android. You must download Oracle's and use that for the Java compilation stages. Then google's java byte code to dalvik byte code conversion is performed.
But yes, the class libraries come from Harmony, not Oracle
This makes me worry who will show up as the spoiler like the idiot-vice-president / cunning-evil-genius character in the move My Fellow Americans. Jack Lemmon, James Gardner, Dan Aykroyd, and John Heard as the evil idiot-savant.
Cheers,
You're confusing two markets. The first is the application platform. If you're the one writing the low-level OS and apps, that's one thing.
If you're talking about things like iphone and android, then you're talking about an app market with 10's of thousands of applications, few of which have any idea of what the underlying hardware is... At worst, you have issues with screen layout because screen sizes change.
So, a new processor comes out, and now you want to make all 10,000 of those vendors recompile their apps? You also want to make the customer choose which version of the app to download?
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
In reading about this mess, I would like to see if my understanding is correct:
Before Oracle aquired Sun, Sun seemed to be a fairly cool company. They came out with the Java language, and release it in such a manner that anyone and everyone could use it. Hence it being picked up by educators and such so they can teach the OO style of programming. Sun was also very active in updating it and fostering a community around it. They even released a good sized portion of it as Open Source (This is how I assume Google and alot of other open source projects came to be).
Everything was going good and dandy until Oracle bought them up. Now, from what I've been reading and can remember (I've been paying attention to the tech industry since about 1998 - Graduated HS, got a CS degree and such since) Oracle is a company who seems to have the philosophy that they try to buy up what competes with them, then for all intents and purposes, destroys the parts it deems "not high retern on investment" and then tries to bleed the other parts dry until they are worthless.
This Sun bit seems to be a great example. They seem to not see much of a market for OpenSolaris & OpenOffice, so they pretty much just cut them off immediatly. With Java, they see the potential of possibly putting in a pay structure somehow, and step one seems to be sueing everyone who has their hands in the java pot (so to speak). If I'm not mistaken, this is the same thing going on with MySQL.
To me, the whole situation sucks. Going though school, I was taught Java. Up until my senior year of college, I only had 2 classes taught in non-java languages, and as such I feel I have a connection to the language. Now that Oracle seems to be completely messing the situation up (and unfortunatly it seems they have the right to) I don't get all warm and fuzzy when I think of java.
IMHO, it seems very unfortunate (and please don't think I'm supporting Oracle by saying this. I'm not) but a Judge or someone should tell google to just leave anything Java behind (and not just Google) and let Oracle do what they want with it. Then, when people stop using Java because Oracle has run it into the ground, Java will be put out of it's misery. I really don't want to see this happen, but I don't see any other way. In the end, Oracle will be out a lot of $ & the world will be out of Java. While one of those outcomes I welcome, I don't think I could live in a javaless world.
I guess I can't say we would be javaless, there are the open source java implimentations... Anyway, Please correct me if you think I am off base in any way.
P.S.: I unistalled java from all my machines as well as all software that uses Java once I heard about Oracle sueing Google over this. I don't want to support Oracle in any way, shape, or form.
Steve Jobs was Larry Ellison's official wedding photographer as per Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Ellison
How many is that, again?
He's saying that the parts of Apache Harmony which are copyrightable are those parts which involved some creativity in their expression.
Apache Harmony was designed as a replacement for Sun's JDK class libraries -- in order to fulfil its intended function, it MUST be API-compatible, and so the API design is completely dictated by the interoperability requirement and has no creative element to it at all.
Therefore, when Google receives the Apache Harmony source code under license from the Apache foundation, the license covers only the copyrightable parts, whose copyright is entirely owned by Apache Harmony. Oracle doesn't own squat in this picture, except the copyrightable parts of *their own* code, which neither Apache Harmony nor Google is using.
Oracle is doing much harm to Java. In the longtime this will not pay off at all.
An AC below pointed me to an article at zdnet that has a copy of the complaint and excerpts of the exhibits.
The one example listed is in PolicyNodeImpl: OpenJDK version, Android version.
It was released under the GPL as part of the OpenJDK, but the license has been changed to Apache 2.0 in the Android version. Unless the original author authorized this, that is not kosher. I can't find in in the HEAD of the Harmony repository. Also note that it appears in a test directory of the Android tree - probably included to test against their own implementation.
Microsoft is leading the way with frivolous IP lawsuits against Motorola and HTC, and potentially now Acer and Asustek. Apple has been busy too, they attacked HTC for stealing iPhone technology and Sanho for making replacement cables for your Mac. Meanwhile, Oracle appears to be looking for victims in the Java camp and is now leading the way with a suit against Google. Heck, even Paul Allen got into the fray with his lawsuit against just about everybody -- from Apple to YouTube.
I think more than anything, this is an artifact of a bad economy. Companies are looking for ways to make money in a climate where consumers still aren't buying things. You don't have to take my word for it, according to Google the volume of news articles referencing "lawsuit" has steadily been on the increase since around mid-2008.
Eric Sarjeant
eric[@]sarjeant.com
Sun basically made a Java implementation (partial implementation, whatever) but didn't call it Java. So they may be in breech of Sun's licenses.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
Has the Supreme Court ruled on the copyrighting of a functional interface?
Sometimes there is only 1 way to do something. If that "something" I want to do is to allow existing source code to compile using my binaries or existing binaries to link up with mine, well, there's frequently only one way to do it.
Now, Oracle may have a claim on the parts of the documentation that could've been rewritten without breaking any tools or any organizational changes that could've been made without breaking anything.
On the other hand, if Google copied Java code for any reason other than compatibility, they could easily lose.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
If being a good programmer is so easy, why are they so expensive to hire?
Not all of Sun's Java code went into Harmony et. al. So, maybe.
The point of the project was that NONE of Sun's Java code would go into the project. They started with a clean slate and implemented all of the methods with their own code. They also had processes in place with the intention of keeping out the original Java code in contributions.
Oracle is basically stating that by using the same package names, class names, and parameters that Android is an infringing derivative. This is the same argument as the SCO ABI argument. That was laughed out of court IIRC.
Post anonymously - For when your opinion embarrasses even you!
GPL V3 certainly has more robust patent protections, but V2, despite being less explicit on the matter, can definitely be argued to imply any patent grants necessary for someone downstream to exercise their rights as well. Exactly how far a court would imply has never to the best of my knowledge been tested, so if this does become an issue at trial it could be very interesting.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Have you even looked at the code? The functions are taken line by line.
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/oracle-says-google-directly-copied-java-code-heres-the-line-by-line-comparison/41025
Java belongs to Slashdot? :P
... for this non-sense... Sun did a good thing, and Oracle f**ked it up. They need to be targeted for exploitation and destruction - so anyone using them as a DB are unsafe. We did it for MS Internet-Explorer, we can do it for Oracle...
Someone already broke down the code:
http://www.binplay.com/2010/10/look-at-copied-oracle-code.html
Looks like a cut and paste job with amateurish renaming.
A programmer already broke it down:
http://www.binplay.com/2010/10/look-at-copied-oracle-code.html
It's a cut and paste job, and a poor one at that.
I agree with all of that, but it has nothing to do with Black-Man's post. In fact the entire problem here is that they did "make these packages available to everyone" in a manner that they weren't allowed.
Everybody complain about Stallman position but he's proving once again to be right. If Java from Sun was licensed under GPLv3 then nothing this would be happening.
Versions that work (unless they really did claim that Google copied Slashdot's Java code):
Oracle Claims Google 'Directly Copied' Its Java Code
Oracle Claims Google 'Directly Copied Our Java Code'
Comment removed based on user account deletion
That sounds like bullshit claim - programming interfaces, including names of classes and methods forming part of an interface (which in the java case they blatantly do) are simply not copyrightable, and that's been previously upheld in US courts AFAIK.
C or C++ code *can* be portable, as you said. It depends on what you're doing with it. If it interacts with a windows-only library, it ain't gonna work on 'nix.
The same applies to Java though, after a fashion. I've seen plenty of modules that relied on windows or mac-only situations, such as a OS-specific directory path, etc.
With a cleanroom implementation, you'd usually not expect private variables to have the same name.
However, some of these unusual identifiers also seem to occur in Windows and COM source code. So, it may be that the original names came from a a Microsoft other design, and both Sun and Harmony copied it from there.
Is it too early to start calling them SCOracle?
Welcome to the internet! You must be new here. But don't worry; there are only a few simple ground-rules. First of all, understand that the highest form of argument is to compare your opponent to Hitler. Failing that, rephrase your opponent's position in terms of a car analogy. And most important of all--discredit your opponent in every post by referring to him as a "troll."
To complicate the matter, being correct, complete, and relevant doesn't matter a bit if your opponent has citations. There is no citation more trust-worthy than an obscure blog. Build a library of biased, inflammatory blogs which tend to back your own positions; this is your only defense.
Now go to it! I'll get you started: "A language specification is like an engine schematic. This is the Free World; we don't just give our engine designs away. Remember Volkswagen got its start when Hitler shared specifications... I mean, are you even being serious, or are you just trolling? As you can see in this blog..."
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
Well, one missing tab at the last line of a conditionnal lead to a programming error but NO SYNTAX ERROR...
if a :
[tab]if b :
[tab][tab]c
[tab][tab]d
[tab]e
versus
if a:
[tab]if b:
[tab][tab]c
[tab]d
[tab]e
That's the kind of mistake that could be hunted down for ages with no help from the compiler/interpreter as there is no syntax error...
Try to forget one closing brace in C/Java/Php/Perl/... and the compiler will burp !
Another problem comes when you've several programmers working on the same project with different tab sizes and indent convention. with langages like C/Perl/Php/Java/..., you can have the code reindented and reformatted automatically (think of indent for C code). Pythod would ask some human to do the work or some external way to enforce it.
Treating whitespaces as anything beside "one or more" = SEPARATOR is clearly a bad idea... precisely because you can't see the difference between spaces or tabs on a listing (and don't even think to use some proportionnal font)
Except Jabba (the Hutt)'s not much easier to write than C++, doesn't take advantage of multiple cores, and is much slower. Minecraft uses 560 MB of RAM with Doom-quality graphics and is as slow as heck. I can run KKrieger (a 96KB game written in C/C++ that's completely procedurally generated, with good graphics fine on my computer, but Minecrap is slow because it's written in Jabba.
A programming language has 3 main parts, ease to write, speed, and space. Assembly is fast and saves space, but is hard to write. Perl, Python, and Ruby are short and easy to write, but are slow. Good C and C++ are about the middle when it comes to speed, ease, and space, but allow inline assembly and complex bit hacks/optimizations. Jabba is slow, about the same difficulty as C and C++, and uses more space (because you have to rewrite stuff or use special libraries that implement things other languages call from the OS or that are part of the language itself). Java fails on all speed, difficulty, and space.
This is pure evil from Oracle.
First of all, it is unlikely that Google actually programmed that part. It was probably part of Harmony.
They could have just nicely asked to reimplement the conflicting classes, instead they are trying to outmanouvre Google using lawsuits.
Personally, I would like them to supply J2ME to android on top of the Dalvic VM and Harmony so they could rake in some money from the phone manufacturers or carriers.
J2ME is not suitable for a smart phone, what the heck are they trying to accomplish here?
The suit doesn't have to do with OpenJDK. Google didn't use OpenJDK.
They used another implementation, parts of which have been shown to be basically copy/paste/rename jobs.
And they mangled the implementation to half be Java and half not, while still calling it Java all over the place in their developer docs.
Google could have used a fully-compliant implementation of Java. Or it could have licensed J2ME (which was never free--it paid for free Java). But it didn't.
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
Somebody mod this funny.
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
Are you stupid, or just asleep?
Why isn't the parent comment (and its parent) moderated up? They are some of the most insightful/informative comments on this topic.
Just as an FYI:
Oracle Objects to SCO's Cure Notice
"Oracle asks the court to deny any forward motion on SCO's request to assume and assign any Oracle executory agreement without Oracle's consent."
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
Oracle isn't going anywhere. This lawsuit isn't going to be anything at all like SCO/IBM or SCO/Novell because Oracle is many times larger than SCO is and is at least 2 orders of magnitude more relevant.
Java is everywhere. Schools teach it. Companies use it.
If Google really copied things from the Java source like actual source code or documentation, they might be screwed. It sounds like from the summary that the bulk of this 'copying' was the API, which I don't think is even eligible for copyright(not artistic).
The APIs are governed by a patent license that states how the APIs are to be presented. In fact it goes specifically to forbid presenting a subset or a superset of the APIs presented under the java.*, javax.* package/namespaces (and the org.* namespaces currently included into the J2SEE, J2ME and JEE profiles.)
Here is where Google is screwed since people that program for Dalvik are using a subset of the Java API (in addition to extensions.)
However...
The patent license was intended in this way to prevent someone from doing something that is a superset or subset of "official" Java, and call it Java.
Here, Google has never called what they do on Dalvik "Java". So on that technicality, they might (just might) have some legal room to maneuver.
However, Google has implicitly presented the Dalvik platform to Java developers (J2ME developers in particular) saying "you can using your Java skills to develop in Android. It's just like Java."
That kind of wording, however implicit as it might be, that can be justifiably open to litigation.
The jury is still out on how all of this is going to pan out, but it is important to understand (regardless of how you feel about it) the following:
By doing so, and by not buying Sun when they had the chance, Google has put itself is a midly annoying position. It is not a precarious one as I'm sure Google has enough muscle to fight it off (or come to a settlement with Oracle.) But it is an annoying one for everybody else.
"Do Only Evil"
I don't think Oracle has any interest in Java, they are more interested in Sun's hardware division. Since Java development is not in their core line of business, they would rather sell it to a big corporation like Google that is already putting it to good use. And by doing that, they will kill two birds with one stone: Sell Java for "billions", while still retaining Sun's hardware division. The lawsuit is meant to act as a negotiating basis for setting a huge price tag on Java !