On Jul 22, 1:13 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: > I listened to the latest podcast and there was a lot of discussion > about how Oracle could go after Google because Android is an alternate > java implementation. What is the basis for this? > > see this about the microsoft/sun > settlement:http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/jw-01-2001/jw-0124-iw-mssuncourt.html > > Does Google have a similar licensing agreement with Sun/Oracle? > I just can't imagine that Google would leave itself open to a giant > lawsuit as the Dick/Joe suggested.
There wouldn't be any basis for it so long as Google doesn't try to say that Android is a proper implementation of Java. Sun/Oracle uses trademark licensing terms to limit what widgets can be claimed to contain Java(TM). Android fails to be compatible with Java on many fronts - incomplete runtime library that's not compatible with any JSR - incompatible byte codes - lack of JNI - etc etc. Just because it has a compiler that compiles the Java language, and just because some of the runtime classes might be compatible with the Java API, doesn't mean it's Java. Where Microsoft got into trouble was by distributing a thing which failed compatibility tests and then said it was Java. So long as Google doesn't stick the 'Java' label on it they'll be okay. legally But... is it good thing? Android, by being incompatible with the Java ecosystem, is increasing fragmentation in the world. This will lead to greater entropy and the eventual heat death of the universe. We must stop this and get Android to be compatible with Java to decrease the entropy in the world and save humanity. + David Herron http://davidherron.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" 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/javaposse?hl=en.
