Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
"ⓒⓗⓡⓞⓝⓘⓒ!"
5595 Followers
Cecil Helton
12883 Followers
Shelly Cooper
1378 Followers
quickdigger
5219 Followers
Standing My Ground
4858 Followers
Vignesh Kumar R
1799 Followers
Dominique Conte
1824 Followers
markf57Aug 14, 2010
Most lawsuits seem to be baseless.
hardeep1singhAug 15, 2010
Baseless until you have to pay up.
Closed AccountAug 15, 2010
That's also the default reply when you get slapped with a lawsuit regardless of what they are suing you for. WTH, that's baseless!!
mrbitchAug 18, 2010
Interesting how Google's statement seems to try and divert attention away from Oracle's actual target in their lawsuit :
Google's statement :
"We are disappointed Oracle has chosen to attack both Google and the open-source Java community with this baseless lawsuit. The open-source Java community..."
Google doesn't use either of the common Java VMs (both of which are available under Free Software licenses).
Google built its own : Dalvik.
Dalvik may or may not be compatible with the other JVMs, but it is not Free Software, in fact it is not even open source.
Oracle is not attacking Java. Oracle is attacking Dalvik, which is a closed, proprietary product.
spacealienAug 14, 2010
What else did everyone expect Google to say?
Google did work around Sun's patents to avoid having to pay licenses.
And Sun even complained to Google about it, but they didn't have the financial strength to sue Google, Oracle has both the balls and the money to do it, and don't seem to suffer from the "but its Google" syndrome.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20013549-264.html
"It was governed by the GNU General Public License, and Google didn't want mobile phone makers to worry that using Android would force them to release their software's source code under that license's sharing provisions. "
"But Sun didn't include the classpath exception in the Mobile Edition of Java, so mobile device companies that wanted to use Java--and there were many--often ended up paying for a more conventional license to use Sun's technology. "
If Google doesn't have to pay for the license of a product that Sun developed then the others like Nokia and BlackBerry that did pay will looks stupid. In fact anyone who ever Sun licensing fees would look stupid.
Android is designed to make Google money, 10 billion dollars a year as per its CEO, and its build on Java, if they owe money they better pay.
dshadowwolfAug 15, 2010
As you said - the "Worked Around" the patents. That means that they found a way to do what the patent covers <em><strong>WITHOUT</strong></em> actually violating the patents. Quod Erat Demonstrandum,. the lawsuit is baseless.
cthellisAug 15, 2010
Offhand, I believe he meant to say "worked around the license," which is what would actually open them up to being sued over for the patents. If operating under the license, they would have automatic patent protection extended to them, but without it...?
bieberAug 15, 2010
Google hasn't done anything with a product that Sun developed. They're using a completely separate implementation of the Java specifications that neither Sun nor their new owner Oracle has ever had anything to do with.
Seriously, how many more examples like this do we need before people realize that software patents are absolute nonsense? Why even bother calling something a "standard" if no one is allowed to use it without making payments to some third party?
wonderchemistAug 15, 2010
Which my guess is exactly why Oracle is suing. Who controls the future to the Android language that just happens to look and behave like Oracle's Java? If Google adds something that becomes popular (and for which Google owns the IP), can Oracle freely add it into Java or would they have to pay Google royalties?
My guess is we'll see an out of court settlement where Oracle and Google give each other access to current and future Java related IP.
nullcodesAug 15, 2010
To people who are saying "Oracle has the right to make money." Umm, no they don't Java was supposed to be free and open and marketed as such. It was this very nature that made it grow. There is no way Java would have gained nearly as much acceptance and thereby technological improvements if it was not open. Google would have chosen a different technology if Java was not open. They would have either developed their own, or chosen some other open technology. There are many to choose from, and there would have been something else that was as good or better than Java if Java was not widely marketed as open and free. So the answer is no, Oracle is being really s**tty here and reneging on promises in my opinion. It's similar to the Unisys GIF tactics of the early to mid 1990's (where they said the GIF image format was free and then allowed it to become popular and then suddenly announced that the language of the fine print meant they could suddenly claim royalties.)
t440Aug 15, 2010
You can say that again!
kestrel9Aug 15, 2010
Java is supposedly a programming language, but if you can't use it, then it isn't really a programming language. Right now, they are suing Google, but they could sue anybody who uses Java. Isn't there a risk that businesses, universities, and students will abandon Java?
thomasjoulinAug 15, 2010
Oracle is suing because Google is not using the GPL licence, so the mobile phone makers don't have to disclose their improvements to Android. So Java is still supposed to be free and open, but if you want to use it as such you are supposed to make a free and open product (which is the case of Android, but not Sense, for example)
cthellisAug 15, 2010
" Umm, no they don't Java was supposed to be free and open and marketed as such. It was the very nature that made it grow."
Java wasn't GPL'd until 2006. Are you trying to argue it didn't grow from 1995 until 2006?
It was the nature of "simple and familiar" and "write once, run anywhere" that Java was marketed as, and made it grow. Though it never fully delivered, or that well...
spacealienAug 15, 2010
@nullcodes @bieber
"But Sun didn't include the classpath exception in the Mobile Edition of Java, so mobile device companies that wanted to use Java--and there were many--often ended up paying for a more conventional license to use Sun's technology. "
Mobile Edition of Java is not the same as Java that runs on desktops and servers, and this what this lawsuit is about.
"Oracle has the right to make money." -- if the license terms allow for it, yes. They didn't fork out 3.5 billion dollars for Sun because they ran out of space to store all the dollar bills. Maybe if Sun had been more strict about its licensing terms it would have remained a independent company and Java future might have been more bright.
I don't claim to be an expert in licensing laws by any stretch but I would bet that Oracle would have consulted some of the best, pretty sure they ensured its not completely "baseless" before getting into this.
appleofdischordAug 15, 2010
A lot of companies use lawsuits as a business tactic, without any intent to actually win them.
tiakAug 15, 2010
Eh, it doesn't make the people paying licenses look stupid to develop your own product...
spacealienAug 15, 2010
@Tiak
That is exactly what MS claimed with their implementation of Java VM, we all know how far the argument went.
gbudavidAug 15, 2010
Popular:))))
bieberAug 15, 2010
"Java was once thought to be a write-once, run everywhere language but it never quite lived up to that billing thanks to multiple forking. It’s still quite versatile, though."
Was this submitted as a fifth grade writing assignment?
wilhoitmAug 15, 2010
Oracle vs. Google! This is going to be a grudge match!
stealthspcAug 15, 2010
Why the f**k is Google using Java anyways? It's crappy.
tdurdenAug 15, 2010
Google really isn't known for hiring intelligent people to work for them, so probably just an uneducated mistake on their part. Maybe you should offer consulting services to them to explain how crappy their decision was?
neotechniAug 15, 2010
In his defense, John Carmack hates java. He's kind of an expert.
phillyocAug 15, 2010
You use Java every day whether you know it or not. They use it in everything from cheap handheld computer games, to car stereo systems, to Blu-ray players.
stealthspcAug 15, 2010
That doesn't make Java any less s**tty. Every app I use thats written in Java is bulky and slow.
camilos007Aug 15, 2010
They don't blame Java for your crappy programming skills.
And like PhillyOC said, Java is everywhere.
stealthspcAug 15, 2010
I'm a professional programmer. I know what I'm talking about. It's an extremely bloated language.
Please stop mindlessly pretending like you do.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
tdurdenAug 15, 2010
I'm a professional programmer != I'm a good programmer
aminy23Aug 15, 2010
I myself am also a programmer, Java is great for small applications that need to be cross platform, but it can't power resource heavy apps. Frostwire is a great example of a Java app that performs well, it is a client for Gnutella, and it takes a couple of seconds to load, but it performs very well. Java performs very well on Linux if you use JCC, then it compiles it for the processor instead of just in time compiling.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
gibbsj87Aug 15, 2010
Google should just buy Oracle.
camilos007Aug 15, 2010
Hmmmm. You don't use Oracle products much I see.
jakem1Aug 15, 2010
"You can find Oracle in almost all mid and large companies."
Yes, unfortunately this is often true. Oracle have been surprisingly successful at selling their overpriced, outdated technology.
Closed AccountAug 15, 2010
Oracle == SGI 2.0?
subductionAug 15, 2010
gibbsj87: Google can't remotely afford to buy Oracle.
camilos007: Even though they can't afford it, Google is a $155B company and Oracle is a $113B company.
I say this with sincere love: you're both idiots.
camilos007Aug 15, 2010
I'm an idiot because I said Oracle is big? I say this with sincere love : Go f**k yourself.
sethprAug 15, 2010
What Google should do is make a fork of MySQL and add to it everything that is lacking from Oracle DB and MS SQL plus integrate all the features from PostgresSQL.
Easier said than done, but at least make a great MySQL fork before Oracle kills that too!
Closed AccountAug 15, 2010
Like when a weave wearing sheboon sues a company because her good little chirren who didn't do nuffins got electrocuted for trying to break into a warehouse.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
jakem1Aug 15, 2010
Reported.
yerragoAug 15, 2010
Ellison is known to be a sharp businessman. If Google infringed, it should pay. Simple as that. So what if he gets, say 3 % of Google Android revenues.
And don't worry, Ellison isn't the Microsoft Unix stooge named Darl McBride. He doesn't need getting paid by Microsoft.Nor by Apple.
Nice thing about this suit: It's Ellison being Ellison.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
pw378Aug 15, 2010
Android has no revenue, it free. Google makes money indirectly through android by enabling more people to get on the internet with mobile devices. So 3% of $0.00... sounds perfectly fair to me.
jakem1Aug 15, 2010
"...enabling more people to get on the internet with mobile devices"
Funny, I thought that was what they were tying to stifle.
dshadowwolfAug 15, 2010
As far as I can tell this is a baseless lawsuit. Google's Dalvik VM was created specifically to get around the problems inherent in a patent-riddled system. And I also do not see this as being a real problem - the whole "classpath exception isn't in the mobile edition" thing doesn't really apply since it isn't the "mobile version" at all - Dalvik was built based on the standard version.
Since the "standard edition" of Java was released under the GPL the "Open Source" community should be very worried if Oracle prevails in this lawsuit. They are basically saying "We don't care that this is GPL licensed, we are going to file lawsuits on any commercial use" - despite the fact that I have seen no evidence of the GPL licensed Java being strictly for non-commercial use.
mrbitchAug 15, 2010
RE: ".. As far as I can tell this is a baseless lawsuit. Google's Dalvik VM was created specifically to get around the problems inherent in a patent-riddled system."
This is the part where the lawsuit is not so "baseless" :
".. By GPLing Java, Sun lost some of the exclusive rights that they used to have, in particular, anyone using the open sourced version of the OpenJDK is given the patent rights to run the software.
The problem is that the rights are only available as long as you are using the GPL version of Java. Any patent grants are not available if you use a third-party licensed version of the Java virtual machine.
In that case, it seems like the only option would be to to go back to the Sun licensing terms."
dshadowwolfAug 15, 2010
And that is what I'm referring to. Dalvik != JavaVM - it is a completely different Virtual Machine that just happens to utilize the Java bytecode. Since it was created to sidestep the patents, the lawsuit is baseless.
cthellisAug 15, 2010
It was created to sidestep the GPL. That does not mean it automatically sidestepped the patents that protect the Java VM. In fact, being that close, there's a good chance that they're brushing up against any number of patents even if they're not in direct violation, which is why Oracle things they can challenge them over it.
mrbitchAug 16, 2010
@ cthellis, RE: ".. created to sidestep the GPL. That does not mean it automatically sidestepped the patents that protect the Java VM. In fact, being that close, there's a good chance that they're brushing up against any number of patents even if they're not in direct violation, which is why Oracle things they can challenge them over it."
Bingo, you got it, dshadowwolf didn't.
rmxzAug 15, 2010
"despite the fact that I have seen no evidence of the GPL licensed Java being strictly for non-commercial use"
That would be impossible.
The right to run the program for any purpose - including commercial ones - is the first Freedom listed in the GPL
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
nullcodesAug 15, 2010
To people who are saying "Oracle has the right to make money." Umm, no they don't Java was supposed to be free and open and marketed as such. It was this very nature that made it grow. There is no way Java would have gained nearly as much acceptance and thereby technological improvements if it was not open. Google would have chosen a different technology if Java was not open. They would have either developed their own, or chosen some other open technology. There are many to choose from, and there would have been something else that was as good or better than Java if Java was not widely marketed as open and free. So the answer is no, Oracle is being really s**tty here and reneging on promises in my opinion. It's similar to the Unisys GIF tactics of the early to mid 1990's (where they said the GIF image format was free and then allowed it to become popular and then suddenly announced that the language of the fine print meant they could suddenly claim royalties.)
t440Aug 15, 2010
You can say that again!!
catalysisAug 15, 2010
"Umm, no they don't Java was supposed to be free and open and sleazily marketed as such."
Umm no, it was not. The Java license has always been highly restrictive, long before Sun was acquired by Oracle.
beforeiforgetAug 15, 2010
I think you're mistaken. Java was never promoted as free and open. It wasn't up until about a few years ago when they finally (grudgingly) allowed some open source version of it. Up until that time it was the huge enterprise companies that drove Java to the forefront. Companies like IBM, Oracle, SAP, etc made Java the huge backend language that it is today with smaller companies modernizing it with Spring (until they too get swallowed up by VMware/EMC). Google capitalized on the popularity of Java by making it the default development language for Android. This is the reason why they chose it. They would have far fewer developers for the Android Market if it were Python. And Google needs lots of apps out there cause they need to sell ads... cause that's what they are... an ad company.
/Android developer
nullcodesAug 15, 2010
How old are you? Java was always free and they allowed free implementations of it .. for example gnu and other were working on alternative Java virtual machines and compilers. Suddenly when Google does it, it's a big deal. When Java was announced in 1995, they touted is as an open standard .. they freely published all the specs of the virtual machine etc. They were trying to make Java to the standard for running applets within a web browser (it sucked, so Adobe Flash took over in the early 2000's).
nullcodesAug 15, 2010
In addition to the free java compilers such as gcj there were also free Java virtual machines such as Kaffe JVM ... which is what Davlik is kind of like .. they never bitched about Kaffe JVM .. why get upset for DAvlik. Open and free implementations of the JVM were allowed by the license! They are now using some loopholes to go after Google's Davlik.
nullcodesAug 15, 2010
It's funny you mentioned IBM, which thanks to Java being an open standard, made it's own Java virtual machine and Java compiler that compete with Sun's.
johnbelloneAug 15, 2010
Java was only "free" if you did not superset it. Sun never published the language as an ISO standard because they made their money off proprietary implementation (extensions) for vendors that could not (prevented through the license) do it themselves. Java is not an open standard, never was and never will be now that Oracle owns it.
Also the performance of the native Java virtual machine is ridiculously better than the Microsoft, IBM and open source implementation for server-side code. This is why Sun was able to get away with what they were doing for so long. Oracle is worried that the Dalvik VM will basically replace that source of revenue and make their $7 billion dollar purchase irrelevant.
Android was never (to my knowledge) advertised as a Java platform, because it actually isn't. You're writing Java-the-language but it is actually being compiled into a separate, non-compatible bytecode and then executed in a virtual machine that only recognizes that bytecode, e.g. you cannot execute native Java code without running it through this process.
beforeiforgetAug 15, 2010
Null, no need to go to personal attacks. JohnB above summed up the situation pretty well, so I won't go into the 'standards' issue anymore. However, my point still stands in that Google piggybacked off the current popularity of Java by making it the language for Android. Lots of other companies (IBM, Oracle, etc) paid royalties to Sun for their own JVM implementations, so why is Google exempt? Sure, they have their (very different) own implementation and they were hoping to skirt around, but they are using the language and IP, so they should pay. Hopefully, Google doesn't prolong this battle cause it will only hurt Android. I have a feeling they'll settle out of court with Google sending a dump truck of cash to Sun/Oracle.
yerragoAug 15, 2010
OTOH, Ellison may just use this as a ploy to get something else from Google. If there's some sort of quid pro quo involved, and Google appears to end up appearing the victor, and Ellison gets some Google treats, then all's well and good.
wilhoitmAug 15, 2010
Google should have bought MySQL instead of Oracle! As long as Google does no Evil?
tdurdenAug 15, 2010
Sun bought MySQL...Oracle bought Sun. I am not following the does no evil reference...
wilhoitmAug 15, 2010
Just ask Steve Jobs!
phillyocAug 15, 2010
F**K ORACLE!!!
hardeep1singhAug 15, 2010
f**k GOOGLE!!!
The extra exclamation because I just read an article about their net neutrality killing plans.
lemonseamonkeyAug 15, 2010
f**k CORPORATIONS!! (is what it really boils down to)
falstaffAug 15, 2010
My company used to do a lot of business with Sun, but now that Oracle is jacking the rates up (primarily hardware support, here), we're looking for another vendor.
They bought the goose that lays golden eggs, and are now eating it for dinner. f**k Oracle is right.
skeloothAug 15, 2010
f**k both companies. I'll patiently wait for a new, truely non evil, innovator to emerge, and I will put my sources towards that technology in the future. I'm feeling more than a little burnt by Google's recent actions, and they're too big to be going down that dark road.
Oracle, meh, I've always hated oracle products, so, nothing new here.
evilkrustydollAug 15, 2010
All geniuses are evil.
cthellisAug 15, 2010
Not true. Some of them are Real.
"Would you prepared if gravity reversed itself? The only thing I can't figure out is how to keep the change in my pockets... I've got it! Nudity!"
camilos007Aug 15, 2010
In before Java sucks....oh too late.
Closed AccountAug 15, 2010
I really hope that this lawsuit doesn't damage the communities that develop for Oracle-owned products such as Java and MySQL. I know that I wouldn't want to be contributing to a product when companies that use my changes will squabble over licenses and ownership.
camilos007Aug 15, 2010
I had no idea Android used a subset of Java. Google did what Sun could never do, create a good mobile JVM. I always detested j2me with a passion.
swizzcheezAug 15, 2010
Prognostication: Android 3.0 starts supporting Go and some hotspot compiled version of Python (like Psyco) then Android 4.0 drops Dalvik entirely.
Ok, I'm a dreamer.
(BTW, yeah I know about AIS. It's a PITA and not nearly as powerful as Jython in terms of being able to access the lower lever introspection of Java)
sej7278Aug 15, 2010
or just ditch the java part and go with c-python like nokia?
hey if android 4 gets go and cpython, then i might buy one. the day i heard it ran java i lost interest.
tombkillaAug 15, 2010
This is why I won't even touch mysql now either. Ellison flies his own fighter jet, paid for by hard working people like you and me. To hell with oracle and all your subsidiaries.
danielphermousAug 15, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
ssomu007Aug 15, 2010
Discuss and solve the problem as a friend's manner. Law is not best solution.
ryebryeAug 15, 2010
Google's Android stuff uses the Apache Harmony project - none of the sun crap.
I hate Oracle.
pw378Aug 15, 2010
photo-shopped! (I called it first) ;)
bashmohandesxAug 15, 2010
This is just the same lawsuit sun had against Microsoft in late nineties, it ended up by Microsoft paying Sun good money, and Microsoft started .net framework & C# languages, and ended up very well even better than it would have been if it used Java.
I think Google will just do the same, and invent its own programming language or support other languages such as Python or Ruby
inolesAug 15, 2010
Did Google already have the programming language which is Go?
bashmohandesxAug 15, 2010
Google Go is just a joke language so far which didn't get any sort of adoption by devs, I am talking about a full stack of technology, platform and tools something like how .net & Windows & Visual Studio
toufyAug 15, 2010
The situation is different...
Microsoft used to have a stupid implementation for the Java language and called it J++, and they replaced this with .NET framework...
the situation here is that Google are stuck with Java because so many applications for android are already written in Java, so they'll have to support that or they're screwed...
johnbelloneAug 15, 2010
Microsoft created third-party Java-the-language extensions to their Java virtual machine which breached Sun's licensing agreement. This has nothing to do with the Oracle lawsuit. What Microsoft did was implement Java-the-language, extend it, and then try to pass it off as the official Java.
bashmohandesxAug 15, 2010
This is exactly what Google did
johnbelloneAug 15, 2010
No, Google didn't do this. There's a difference between Java-the-language and the Java virtual machine. Google wrote a frontend for their own virtual machine. The same thing could be done for Python, Ruby or C#.
bashmohandesxAug 17, 2010
Microsoft tried to do the same thing by implementing the JVM for Windows to make it more optimized for Windows apps because of how slow Java was on Desktop applications (and still is)
johnbelloneAug 17, 2010
What Microsoft did and what Google did are two different things. Google has their virtual machine which is, under the hood, different than the JVM - it does not execute JVM bytecode - Microsoft built a custom JVM with extensions that were not in the Java specification and tried to call it Java.
shanosAug 15, 2010
Google should be the spokesperson and campaign to end software patents.
evilkrustydollAug 15, 2010
The Oracle said to Google, You are "Not the One", sorry kiddo, have a cookie.
caseyd1020Aug 15, 2010
Oracle should be honored Google chose to use their language in their product. They could just have easily designed their own and Oracle would not have the prestige of being included in the mobile market.
arcticrobotAug 15, 2010
Let me guess. You are honored by Google letting you to use their products and services. What a mess.
paddy8788Aug 20, 2010
Did anyone notice that when Android was first released, Oracle CEO congratulated it on the contribution to the Java language and community?
londubhAug 15, 2010
The potential for lawsuits had Oracle's lawyers licking their lips over the purchase. Sun did win a huge infringement settlement from Microsoft. I'm sure Oracle waited until Android took off. If it hadn't, there'd be no money to be had. Now they've caught Google with their pants down, metaphorically. They can force them to settle for a pretty penny.
Java Creator Admits ‘No Surprise’ Over Android Lawsuit
http://www.eweekeurope.co.uk/knowledge/java-creator-admits-no-surprise-over-android-lawsuit-8999
This will halt any major Android development until the suit is settled. Java is not fully open sourced. Oracle feels they have enough of a case to file a lawsuit but most likely can't win it. I'll bet their hoping Google will do the math and figure it'll be cheaper to settle than to try and win.
Oracle are the bigger jerks here. I'm pretty annoyed that Google has become a surrender monkey on Net Neutrality. It seems that the bigger the company is the bigger the assh**es they become. Everyone loves to hate Bill Gates, myself included, but when you look at the other big players, Scott McNealy, Larry Ellison, Steve Jobs, they are all f**king assh**es. I may like products Apple and Google offer me but I'm not crazy about their companies. However, I can do just fine without Java or Oracle or MySQL.
asimpledadAug 15, 2010
How many people in the valley has Oracle squeezed and squeezed to get what they want. How many new grads? It seems a pretty common opinion that of all the companies in the valley Oracle is the worst. I have heard multiple stories Oracle holding out on paying small companies hoping those companies run out of funds so Oracle gets a sweeter deal. And everyone talks how Oracle is a mill for recent graduates. Get them in full of energy and cheap, burn then out, then send them out. They could all just be stories, but it sure seems there is a pattern to Oracles ugliness. You want to get companies to change? Stop considering Oracle, and let them know why.
barbizonAug 15, 2010
Google is one to be disappointed.
nepidaeAug 15, 2010
Google is the new Oracle to be completely honest. it is no longer the "cool" silicon valley company it once was, which pisses me off because its such a waste.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
gilbesAug 15, 2010
Well played Google.
Their VM copies large parts of Java wholesale, so that point is indefensible.
It is much better to play the tech crowds gross misunderstanding of Open Source. They think that Open Source means code is available to do whatever you want with it. And those Open Source licenses contain thousands of words guaranteeing all these rights.
HAHAHA those idiots will believe anything.
Legally they are going to lose this one hard. But their PR campaign is off to a good start.
You know that That MIT license, the one that actually allows you to really do whatever you want with the code and is only a few sentences? It is a fluke and has nothing to do with this ..... unfortunately ..... for Google.
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
johnbelloneAug 15, 2010
This is simply wrong.
gilbesAug 15, 2010
Care to attempt to elaborate?
Or does feeling a certain way about a topic trump the facts for you.
johnbelloneAug 15, 2010
I've elaborated in other places. Take a gander at the rest of the threads.
p5ychoAug 15, 2010
So are a lot of other things, but there's nothing we can do about it. And the Dalvic VM is just the first thing to be attacked in Android. But it won't be the last. Google uses a lot of stuff which according to the licenses should've already been open-sourced, but still haven't
johnbelloneAug 15, 2010
I've elaborated in other places. Take a gander at the rest of the threads.
johnbelloneAug 15, 2010
Wow, I am reading these comments and it seems that none of you have any idea what Google actually did with Dalvik (the VM that Android uses). The Dalvik VM is not Java; it does not execute Java bytecode nor does it use any source code licensed from Sun. Google intentionally created a separate virtual machine to (a) solve key issues with running a virtual machine on embedded hardware and (b) to get around the mobile licensing fiasco that Sun had created. The key point here is that Dalvik has absolutely nothing to do with Java.
But what Google did do is write a frontend extension that compiles Java-the-language (syntax) into Dalvik an intermediate Dalvik bytecode, which is actually then compiled again on the phone, but the point here is to understand that the frontend can be replaced with C# (or any language syntax that they wish). Google merely supports "describing" applications on the Android platform in Java-the-language.
This lawsuit is over patents because Oracle (formerly Sun) is worried that Dalvik will (a) become the de-facto go-to implementation of Java-the-language in the mobile space and (b) could potentially be moved over into the desktop/server space and compete directly with the proprietary Java virtual machine in speed, etc. The way that Java was open sourced basically limits anyone from creating a superset of Java without breaking the clause that gives you patent coverage.
What I don't understand is what Oracle is thinking. Google has a hell of a patent portfolio that could perhaps target some of Oracle's bread and butter - database technology - and the last thing you want to do is piss off the open source kings who could very well roll a database suite to compete with your money maker.
neotechniAug 15, 2010
I appreciate you explaining that.
From what you said, Oracle has no chance.
johnbelloneAug 15, 2010
I know nothing about the patents they are claiming Google has breached. They may very well have and could very well lose the case. But I am also sure that Oracle has skirted more than a few of Google's patents. If all goes well in the end software patents would be invalidated in the United States, but I am a wishful thinker.
You're very welcome.
certainAug 15, 2010
Woah, great breakdown. I had no idea what to make of all of this.
p5ychoAug 15, 2010
Maybe google copied parts of the VM and that's the problem?
johnbelloneAug 15, 2010
Sun has a lot of patents related to virtual machine technology as Java was a pioneer in this aspect, but as far as I know the Dalvik technology is completely independent (and actually vastly different) than the actual Java virtual machine technology. So I'd very much doubt there is any Sun code.
marinmanAug 15, 2010
Does Google have a huge portfolio of database technology? I'm honestly asking.
Does Google have any experience (patents) building its own software?
johnbelloneAug 15, 2010
Google works a lot with distributed database technology, most of what they use has been rolled in-house and either open sourced or had a detailed paper written about it. You can read a lot regarding their database stuff by searching for "BigTable."
marinmanAug 16, 2010
Thanks, will dig into it.
tusseydAug 15, 2010
Excellent point. Could easily cause Google to explore developing an alternative open-source language and database.
I have no faith that Oracle will preserve OpenOffice, MySQL, or Java as viable open source products. It's just simply not in their DNA.
certainAug 15, 2010
Woah. Great breakdown. I had no idea what to make of all of this.
sej7278Aug 15, 2010
anything that kills java gets my vote.
oracle seem to be going out of their way to shaft themselves though, so that's now java, solaris and mysql that nobody is going to use anymore.
remember back in the day when microsoft wanted to kill the competition they bought them out and shut the products down.....
swizzcheezAug 15, 2010
@se7278
Actually, I agree completely. I was just heading off the assumption that AIS would satisfy my Pythonic cravings. Personally, I'd prefer Python gain a native level activity and have a Psyco-style JIT compiler for Python into native code.
But, again, it's just dreaming...
tusseydAug 15, 2010
This is a perfect example of why many commercial companies are reluctant to pursue open-source to run the enterprise...they just do not have any faith in the strength of the open-source licenses.
If there is any basis to this suit at all -- which from what I've read seems unlikely -- it's possible that Google will abandon Java altogether and create a programming environment of their own, probably Python based.
tusseydAug 15, 2010
I have no faith that Oracle will preserve OpenOffice, MySQL, or Java as viable open source products. It's just simply not in their DNA.
bytemeaholeAug 16, 2010
Nuke Oracle...
unitedatheismAug 16, 2010
Do you guys know Sun at all??
I mean, this is _so_ the way Sun works. The only way I could be surprised is that it took this long for them to start trying to extort some money out of Google!