Imported from previous forum
[ original email was from Toby Corballis - toby.corballis@rapidaddition.co.uk ]
Early in 2009 Oracle bought Sun Microsystems. At the time I said on a few blogs that I thought it would not be long before they started try to make capital from Java, the hitherto free platform.
Last week, it seems that, Oracle showed their hand by launching a suit against Google for inappropriate use of licenes in their Android operating system (targeted at mobiles and tablets with up to 7in screens). Basically, this looks like Oracle saying “from now on, we want to be paid for people using Java”.
If they win - and that is, granted, quite a big “if” that depends on a plethora of factors - then what is the likely impact for companies using Java technologies (I would doubt that Oracle will stop with Google if they win), and for all the opensource products based on Java technology?
There is no saying how much Oracle might want to start charging for use of Java which could expose an awful lot of firms to an awful lot of cost that they weren’t expecting.
I’d be interested in hearing the thoughts of others.
[ original email was from Jim Hunt - jim@marketing-dreams.co.uk ]
> Early in 2009 Oracle bought Sun Microsystems. At the time I said on a few blogs that I thought it would not be long before they started try to make capital from Java, the hitherto free platform.
Last week, it seems that, Oracle showed their hand by launching a suit against Google for inappropriate use of licenes in their Android operating system (targeted at mobiles and tablets with up to 7in screens). Basically, this looks like Oracle saying “from now on, we want to be paid for people using Java”.
Yesterday Reuters played it’s “Requiem for an OS”, reporting that “Seemingly abandoned by its new owner, the open-source version of the Solaris operating system, called OpenSolaris, has now lost its governing board as well”
I’d be interested in hearing the thoughts of others.
I’ve not read the small print, and I’m not a lawyer. (Are there any lawyers here who have?). All this seems certain to spread lots of FUD at the very least, and many smaller players than Google might well be calling their lawyers as we speak!
Last week, it seems that, Oracle showed their hand by launching a suit against Google for inappropriate use of licenes in their Android operating system (targeted at mobiles and tablets with up to 7in screens). Basically, this looks like Oracle saying “from now on, we want to be paid for people using Java”.
…
I’d be interested in hearing the thoughts of others.
Toby, this is not my understanding of the lawsuit. This lawsuit is specific to J2ME which is not governed by the same GPL licensing as the rest of Java. Google built their own Java runtime, compiler and bytecode format so they wouldn’t have to pay licensing fees for J2ME. However, there were deviations from being fully Java compliant, which goes against the license granted by Sun/Oracle for cleanroom implementations. Additionally, Google had hired away several Sun engineers to work on this project.
I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that
-
this case is not a frivolous lawsuit without standing, but a legitimate attempt to defend Oracle’s intellectual property according to specific and well known licensing agreements. Meaning, this is not a bait and switch where something was declared to be OpenSource and then was tried to be pulled back in. I am not saying that Oracle is correct, just that the case seems to have standing.
-
This is limited to companies working on implementing Java runtimes, compilers, etc and their adherence to the licensing terms as laid out by Oracle/Sun.
It is my understanding that except for very minor parts of Java (which have been spelled out explicitly), the entire JDK, compiler, etc are under the GPL license, which cannot be revoked.
Hi Andy,
You are definitely right.
The patents are concerning only Virtual Machine implementation by Android VM (called Dalvik VM). Without entering into details, let’s just say that it’s too close from the Sun JVM implementation.
J2ME (mobile edition) is actually a piece of Java that creates revenue at Sun/Oracle. So I suppose Oracle want to protect it - any firm will do the same. Rumors: Android success could have hurt the ego of some J2ME engineer at Sun/Oracle…
J2SE (standard edition) is free and open-sourced.
Regards
Georges
Last week, it seems that, Oracle showed their hand by launching a suit against Google for inappropriate use of licenes in their Android operating system (targeted at mobiles and tablets with up to 7in screens). Basically, this looks like Oracle saying “from now on, we want to be paid for people using Java”.
…
I’d be interested in hearing the thoughts of others.
Toby, this is not my understanding of the lawsuit. This lawsuit is specific to J2ME which is not governed by the same GPL licensing as the rest of Java. Google built their own Java runtime, compiler and bytecode format so they wouldn’t have to pay licensing fees for J2ME. However, there were deviations from being fully Java compliant, which goes against the license granted by Sun/Oracle for cleanroom implementations. Additionally, Google had hired away several Sun engineers to work on this project.I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that
this case is not a frivolous lawsuit without standing, but a legitimate attempt to defend Oracle’s intellectual property according to specific and well known licensing agreements. Meaning, this is not a bait and switch where something was declared to be OpenSource and then was tried to be pulled back in. I am not saying that Oracle is correct, just that the case seems to have standing.
This is limited to companies working on implementing Java runtimes, compilers, etc and their adherence to the licensing terms as laid out by Oracle/Sun.
It is my understanding that except for very minor parts of Java (which have been spelled out explicitly), the entire JDK, compiler, etc are under the GPL license, which cannot be revoked.