I'd like to imagine that this will somehow spark a "serious" debate on the value of software patents, though I doubt that very much. It's hard to imagine any lawyer working for such a cause that would, ultimately, reduce the future need for lawyers. In a country where 1 in every 300 people is a lawyer (the highest of any country in the world, I believe), they have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo :)
More likely, Oracle wants to push for license fees from Java usage wherever possible, and sees android as a pretty large target in this arena. Of course, they'll be able to waive that fee in cases where SunFire servers, solaris, etc. is used to drum up a few cross-sales. (the reasoning goes something like this: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/StrategyLetterV.html) The cat really is out of the bag with regards to OpenJDK being GPL licensed, but I reckon they'll claw back everything else they possibly can. Too many people are dependent on Java now, and to a particular kind of mind that just looks ripe for milking. On 13 August 2010 17:05, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]> wrote: > Indeed, the more I think about this the less sense it starts to make. > Though, most folks think this is about java (the language). It really > isnt, it's about VM technology. Which makes it all the stranger to > attack *JAVA*-based VM. Wasn't there a non-java using target out > there? > > The play here might be to get google to 'buy' the java assets, but > that really doesn't mesh at all with what ellison's been saying. > Perhaps he's been looking at the numbers and doesn't want to be java's > steward anymore. Crazy risky, though if that really does happen, I'll > be a happy camper. > > On Aug 13, 8:00 am, Michael Neale <[email protected]> wrote: > > yes I don't think the *actual* damage to google will be another other > > then comically insignificant. I can't see how either side would > > benefit. > > > > All Oracle are doing are making people nervous, confirming fears, and > > generally causing a whole lot of frustration when everyone knows there > > can be no benefit. > > > > At first I thought it may have been a re-assertion of the "one java" > > portability, which whilst I don't agree with personally could almost > > make a tiny bit of sense. But this, no... it is madness - the thing is > > I can't imagine how this could be good for Oracle at all. really no > > chance of short term gain, and certainly a good chance of long term > > damage to a technology stack that is critical to them. > > > > (I will refrain from the doucheyness of standing behind patents as > > there is plenty said about that). > > > > On Aug 13, 3:55 pm, Robert Casto <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Most of the patents involved were methods and procedures for how > something > > > is done. All the patents appeared old with the latest being 2005. You > could > > > make the case that since Sun didn't defend these patents for years, > there is > > > not much Oracle can do about it now. Patent law is really strange in > this > > > regard, but it is my understanding that you have to do things to defend > your > > > patents. Letting them sit for 5 years and then being bought by someone > else > > > and then defended may not sit well with the judges. > > > > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 1:12 AM, Mark Derricutt <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > I think that's kinda irrelevant ( the java source anyway ) as some of > the > > > > patents I've seen talk about class processing ( conversion to dalvik > ), > > > > permissions/acls and things that are more of a VM/toolchain side of > things. > > > > > > Having the code in clojure, scala or the like would still involve the > same > > > > - UNLESS someone rewrote the scala/clojure compilers to output Dalvik > > > > bytecode directly... > > > > > > -- > > > > Pull me down under... > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:02 PM, JamesJ <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> So, the obvious solution is for Google to stick it to 'em, ditch > Java, > > > >> adopt another of the JVM languages (Scala, etc) so the port will be > > > >> easy. (Wink Wink) It will just be one more step for Java towards > > > >> irrelevance in the mobile computing space. > > > > > > -- > > > > 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]<javaposse%[email protected]> > <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com> > > > > . > > > > For more options, visit this group at > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > > > > > -- > > > Robert Castowww.robertcasto.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]<javaposse%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > > -- Kevin Wright mail/google talk: [email protected] wave: [email protected] skype: kev.lee.wright twitter: @thecoda -- 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.
