• Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic

Oracle sues Google

 
Hussein Baghdadi
clojure forum advocate
Bartender
Posts: 3479
Clojure Mac Objective C
 
Gregg Bolinger
Ranch Hand
Posts: 15304
6
Chrome IntelliJ IDE Mac OS X
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Larry: "Well, we own Java now. Let the millions start rolling in"

Oracle Lawyer: "Um, sir, Java is free"

Larry: "Well F%^$. Who can we sue then?"
 
Manish Hatwalne
Ranch Hand
Posts: 2595
Android Firefox Browser Ubuntu
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Gregg Bolinger wrote:Larry: "Well, we own Java now. Let the millions start rolling in"

Oracle Lawyer: "Um, sir, Java is free"

Larry: "Well F%^$. Who can we sue then?"


ROFL!
 
Lalit Mehra
Ranch Hand
Posts: 384
Eclipse IDE Firefox Browser Java
 
Paul Sturrock
Bartender
Posts: 10336
Eclipse IDE Hibernate Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Ohh, this should be fun. Sounds quite a lot like Sun's action against MS.
 
Henry Wong
author
Marshal
Pie
Posts: 21420
84
C++ Chrome Eclipse IDE Firefox Browser Java jQuery Linux VI Editor Windows
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Paul Sturrock wrote:Ohh, this should be fun. Sounds quite a lot like Sun's action against MS.


Quite frankly, I have never understood this. Microsoft releases a version of Java that doesn't completely comply with the JCK, and they get sued immediately. Google releases a version of Java, that doesn't even bother to comply with the JCK, and named to something else, and they get left alone for years.

Henry
 
Lester Burnham
Rancher
Posts: 1337
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Henry Wong wrote:Microsoft releases a version of Java that doesn't completely comply with the JCK, and they get sued immediately. Google releases a version of Java, that doesn't even bother to comply with the JCK, and named to something else, and they get left alone for years.

Microsoft licensed Java from Sun, and they called it "Java"; Google did neither.
 
Henry Wong
author
Marshal
Pie
Posts: 21420
84
C++ Chrome Eclipse IDE Firefox Browser Java jQuery Linux VI Editor Windows
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Lester Burnham wrote:
Henry Wong wrote:Microsoft releases a version of Java that doesn't completely comply with the JCK, and they get sued immediately. Google releases a version of Java, that doesn't even bother to comply with the JCK, and named to something else, and they get left alone for years.

Microsoft licensed Java from Sun, and they called it "Java"; Google did neither.


But how did google implement android? Did they start completely from scratch? Or did they start from the java source?

Not licensing, but using someone's codebase is worse. It's stealing... And before someone chimes in about OpenJDK. First, the timing with Android and OpenJDK isn't exactly correct. And second, open source doesn't mean that it is free to modify and use -- it requires that that all changes based on the open source to be released, which google hasn't done.

Henry
 
Lester Burnham
Rancher
Posts: 1337
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Android is based on the Apache Harmony code base, which is licensed under the liberal Apache license. That's why it's fundamentally Java 5, not Java 6 (since that's what Harmony implements).

open source doesn't mean that it is free to modify and use -- it requires that that all changes based on the open source to be released, which google hasn't done.

Actually, what you describe is somewhat like how the GPL works, but not the Apache license (which requires attribution, but not source code releases). But either way, Android is open source (see http://source.android.com/ and http://android.git.kernel.org/), so I'm not sure what else you think they should have made public?
 
Gregg Bolinger
Ranch Hand
Posts: 15304
6
Chrome IntelliJ IDE Mac OS X
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I'm not sure where this google creates a version of java comes from. Google didn't create a version of Java. Android runs on the Dalvik JVM (1 of many JVM implementations out there). Sounds to me like Oracle is suing the wrong company. Of course, it's Google that has the cash. Not Dan Bornstein. The key here, for me, is that Oracle has a mobile platform of its own based on Java. Did anyone else know this prior to the law suit? I sure didn't.
 
Jesper de Jong
Java Cowboy
Saloon Keeper
Posts: 15441
41
Android IntelliJ IDE Java Scala Spring
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Android is indeed not Java, and Google never pretended that it is Java in one form or another.

You can use the Java programming language to program for Android, but Android's JVM does not run Java bytecode, it runs its own Dalvik bytecode. Android is not based on Sun's source code (not on OpenJDK, nor the closed-source version of Sun's JVM implementation).

The point here is that Android uses patented ideas from Oracle's Java implementation. Oracle is suing Google for using those patented ideas without permission.

Gregg Bolinger wrote:Sounds to me like Oracle is suing the wrong company.

Why are they suing the wrong company? It's Google who implemented Android using those patented ideas.

Android is technically owned by the Open Handset Alliance, in which Google is the biggest member.
 
Gaurav Raje
Ranch Hand
Posts: 136
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
one of the Patent they are suing for does look like an infringement on the language use. I didnot check out the rest of the infringements, but this surely does look like something which comes up due to the use of java.

 
Jesper de Jong
Java Cowboy
Saloon Keeper
Posts: 15441
41
Android IntelliJ IDE Java Scala Spring
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
That patent has the title "Protection domains to provide security in a computer system".

That does not sound like it has anything to do with using the Java programming language. I haven't read it in detail, but it looks like it has something to do with downloading classes and running them in a protected environment (a sandbox), and using policy files to configure the sandbox.

What does that have to do with using the Java programming language?
 
Gaurav Raje
Ranch Hand
Posts: 136
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
i didnot read it fully either... but from what i saw it was how the access levels(public private or protected) are implemented in the compiler. The security they mention is the provision provided by the language for hiding the objects with a more restrictive access level
 
Pat Farrell
Rancher
Posts: 4678
7
Linux Mac OS X VI Editor
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Google has money, Oracle wants some. This suit is just the first shots of what will be a long war. Both companies have lots of lawyers and this will go on for years. How long as the idiotic SCO vs the world suit been going on?

I do not see this as "good" for Java, but I've been shorting Java for a while now.
 
Jesper de Jong
Java Cowboy
Saloon Keeper
Posts: 15441
41
Android IntelliJ IDE Java Scala Spring
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Gaurav Raje wrote:i didnot read it fully either... but from what i saw it was how the access levels(public private or protected) are implemented in the compiler. The security they mention is the provision provided by the language for hiding the objects with a more restrictive access level

I don't think that patent has anything to do with public, protected and private access levels. Those are not features that are unique to Java (they existed for example in C++ long before Java was invented). Access levels also do not have to do anything with security. Did you know that it's easy to access private fields via reflection? If access levels were meant to be secure, then that would have been a huge security hole.
 
Jesper de Jong
Java Cowboy
Saloon Keeper
Posts: 15441
41
Android IntelliJ IDE Java Scala Spring
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
James Gosling has been writing some comments on the issue on his blog: Quite the firestorm
 
Jesper de Jong
Java Cowboy
Saloon Keeper
Posts: 15441
41
Android IntelliJ IDE Java Scala Spring
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Long, but good article by Charles Nutter (one of the guys who created JRuby) on the issue: My thoughts on Oracle-vs-Google
 
  • Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic