Another interesting article by Jamie McCracken : "If you ask me, Oracle has scored a massive own goal by suing Google. Not least because if it expects to wrest back control of Java and make billions from it, it will surely be in for a massive disappointment. Here's why:"
http://jamiemcc.livejournal.com/13431.html Hoping he is right :-) François On 14 août, 16:40, Guillermo Schwarz <[email protected]> wrote: > Any one can sue any one, for sure. > > Is the threat of a patent lawsuit enough to discourage individual > developers to continue creating open source? Maybe. > > Is it profitable to sue individual open source developers? Of course > not. They are not generating any revenue and therefore given that any > patent defended in court cost $1 million, any company spending that kind > of money would soon run out of business. > > FUD. Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. > > The reality is that open source kills patents, because open source > developers can easily show that they created the software before the > patents were granted. > > Some patents may be valid, some parts of Linux for example could violate > some patents. But the US law requires patent holders to send a "cease > and desist" letter to the violator. > > The violator (the company commercializing the product in violation of > the patent) may choose to: > > 1. Pay royalties. > 2. Stop commercializing the product. > 3. Continue commercializing the product, ignoring the letter and risk > being sued. > 4. Stop commercializing the product for a while, circumvent the patent > and continue commercializing the product. > > Clearly none of those affect the individual open source developer, only > companies using the invention and commercializing a product that > includes said invention. By the way, if said company uses Perl in your > internal processes and Perl is found to violate a patent, the company > would not have to pay royalties, because the product in question does > not contain the invention. > > As you can see, it is a very uphill situation for the patent holder, > since most companies using open source could easily circumvent patents. > That's the strategy Linux is using and it has worked wonders in the last > 10 years. > > Cheers, > Guillermo. > > > > > > On Sat, 2010-08-14 at 07:19 -0700, François Masurel wrote: > > Open Source doesn't protect at all against patents, that's why they > > have created the GPL v3 which include a patent grant license. Apache > > License might also include some kind of patent protection. Most open > > source licenses don't protect against patent lawsuits. > > > I've found an interesting article "Software Patent Lawsuits Against > > Open Source Developers" by Bruce Perens > > :http://technocrat.net/d/2006/6/30/5032/ > > > Some patents have been invalidated, some have not. > > > On 14 août, 16:01, Guillermo Schwarz <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > On Sat, 2010-08-14 at 05:54 -0700, François Masurel wrote: > > > > > Google could always grab an open source version of Java, name it Gava > > > > > or whatever, and then rename the service gae/gava. > > > > > If the Oracle patents are valid, they will have to pay Oracle > > > > royalties even if they use an Open Source version of Java like Apache > > > > Harmony unless this Java implementation circumvent the Oracle patents, > > > > maybe Dalvik ? > > > > I'm not a lawyer, but I think patents only prevent commercialization of > > > a product, not using the invention or creating an open source product. > > > > Gae/J is a commercial service, but if you use an open source product in > > > order to provide that service, then those patents wouldn't apply. > > > > Then in court Oracle would argue that the patents apply to the closed > > > source part rather than the open source part, and Google would easily > > > show that it applies to the open source part or have a patent to protect > > > their invention. > > > > > It would be interesting to get the Apache Harmony guys point of view. > > > > It is open source => no problem. As you may already know, this has never > > > been tested in court, so who knows really. > > > > It it were tested in court and open source won over patents, then > > > nothing would have changed. For example the zip algorithm was patented, > > > and there were a lot of free implementations for it. Patents have a life > > > span of 25 years or so. The strategy Unisys (the holder of the patent) > > > used was to sue individual users of the patent, namely big websites that > > > had GIF encoded pictures. That triggered the creation of the PNG format. > > > > In case patents won over open source, it would be a very different > > > scenario, since most open source would have to be rewritten. There are > > > patents over basic technology on the Internet like sending files over a > > > communication link, or clicking on a link and downloading software, then > > > most of the Internet would have to be deconstructed and reimplemented > > > using workarounds. I think the Internet would be blacked out for a > > > number of years. There are so many commercial interests on the Internet > > > to continue operating that I see no opportunity for open source to loose > > > against patents. > > > > My 0.02 > > > > > On 14 août, 14:18, Guillermo Schwarz <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > That's a very interesting question. > > > > > > First of all, I doubt Oracle would be interested in killing a cloud > > > > > technology based in Java if there are other corresponding technologies > > > > > doing the same (Python). It would kill half the market AND demonstrate > > > > > Java as inadequate for serious cloud computing. > > > > > > Supposing that Oracle had a competing technology that meant it would > > > > > make reasonable business sense to kill gae/j in order for developers > > > > > to > > > > > switch to their technologies, then Google could always grab an open > > > > > source version of Java, name it Gava or whatever, and then rename the > > > > > service gae/gava. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > Guillermo. > > > > > > On Sat, 2010-08-14 at 02:52 -0700, François Masurel wrote: > > > > > > Will Google App Engine for Java be impacted ? > > > > > > > I guess that if the Oracle patents are validated, Google wont be > > > > > > able > > > > > > to use their "adapted" version of the JDK anymore because it will > > > > > > not > > > > > > pass the TCK tests which is required to get the GPL patent grant. > > > > > > > Does that mean the end of the Google App Engine for Java platform > > > > > > any > > > > > > time soon ? > > > > > > -- > > > > > Simplex Veri Sigillum > > > > -- > > > Simplex Veri Sigillum > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Google App Engine for Java" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]. > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. > > -- > Simplex Veri Sigillum -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine for Java" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
