So basically OpenJDK is only allowed for Java ? => nobody's allowed to derive something from OpenJDK unless it passes TCK. => passing TCK means you keep the "java.*" and "javax.*" packages. => Keeping the packages means it's called "Java".
Swell... :-( On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 08:27, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]>wrote: > If you know the top brass of sun and i.e. the sensibilities of Jon > Schwartz, you'd realize stating that Sun had this in mind all along is > completely wrong. > > Nevertheless, we're stuck with it now. I honestly don't think even > Oracle set out to do it this way; instead Oracle top brass thought > google is not playing fair / is a nice cashcow / has this nice product > they want some say in before they jump on its bandwagon / who knows > what the heck they want, and they asked their team of lawyers to find > a stick to beat google with. Unfortunately the stick they unearthed is > a stick of dynamite. > > It does make me feel ashamed of my own opinion about a year ago, when > I thought apache was going too far. They were right all along. > > On Sep 11, 3:31 am, Keith Haber <[email protected]> wrote: > > If PL/2 doesn't pass the TCK, then PL/2 doesn't have a license to > > Oracle's patents and therefore can be sued for patent infringement. > > Even though the code is derived from Oracle's OpenJDK. Maybe if you > > ripped out the JIT compiler you'd be in the clear from a patent suit > > from Oracle. Maybe. > > > > I agree wholeheartedly with Reinier's farce comment. To me it looks > > like Sun probably had this in mind all along: sucker the developers > > who value open source into committing to your platform, then use the > > patent portfolio to get the lucrative walled garden the open source > > community wanted to avoid all along. Evil isn't too strong a word, if > > that's true. Maybe Sun would have remained a benevolent dictator and > > not acted this way had it stayed independent, but they deliberately > > chose to retain the legal power to take these actions. And now Oracle > > is wielding that power against Google, even if Sun may not have done > > the same thing. > > > > Suddenly the existence of GPL v3 makes a lot of sense. Hooray for > > software patents. > > > > I had a morbid thought this morning. Wouldn't it be a hoot if > > Oracle's lawyers convinced a jury that Scala, Groovy, Clojure, and any > > other alternate JVM languages are supersets of the Java Language > > Specification, and therefore anyone using such technologies are guilty > > of infringing Oracle's patents? (Of course, anyone who adopts JavaFX > > is perfectly in the clear!) > > > > Still hoping someone proves my theory wrong. > > > > Keith > > > > On Sep 10, 5:16 am, Jan Goyvaerts <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Why would PL/2 care about the TCK ? Isn't that only a requirement when > you > > > pretend to have written a JVM ? > > > > > On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 09:04, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > > > > Ah, the patent protection stems from the TCK. Which isn't open. Just > > > > ask Apache. > > > > > > This is not a good thing at all. Oracle, stop this silly crap. This > > > > way, claiming java is "open" is a farce. > > > > > > On Sep 10, 7:24 am, Keith Haber <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > First, IANAL. > > > > > > > My guess is that your hypothetical OpenPL2 based on OpenJDK would > be > > > > > completely in the clear on copyright grounds, but completely *not* > in > > > > > the clear on patent grounds (since you're removing the core Java > > > > > libraries). > > > > > > > You probably want to start athttp://openjdk.java.net/legal/, > > > > > especiallyhttp://openjdk.java.net/legal/openjdk-tck-license.pdf. > It > > > > > specifically disallows subsets and supersets of the "Licensor Name > > > > > Space," meaning the Java core classes and interfaces. You need the > > > > > TCK license to get the patent grants, and you can't get the TCK > > > > > license if your derivative fails to pass the compatibility tests. > The > > > > > "GPL v2 with Classpath Exception" only gives you the necessary > > > > > copyright license, not any patent license. > > > > > > > The Apache Harmony project has been loudly protesting the IP > licensing > > > > > situation for a while now. > > > > > > > Implementing a JVM alternative won't necessarily protect you from > > > > > Oracle's lawyers either. It's certainly not protecting Google; > Dalvik > > > > > is itself a JVM alternative, after all, and that's what Oracle is > > > > > suing them over. > > > > > > > I hope my theory is completely wrong, because the situation kinda > > > > > sucks for the open-source community (and arguably the IT industry > as a > > > > > whole) if I'm right. > > > > > > > Keith > > > > > > > On Sep 9, 3:52 pm, Jan Goyvaerts <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Interesting... so, in theory, any organisation with sufficient > funds > > > > and > > > > > > expertise might actually pull it off to create a serious VM > language. > > > > It > > > > > > would be the right time for that. > > > > > > > > But I guess it would be risky to claim PL/2 happens to be able to > use > > > > any > > > > > > already existing Java libraries ? > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 21:12, Kevin Wright < > [email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Unless somebody had a trademark on "PL2", they might still come > after > > > > > > > you... > > > > > > > > > On 9 September 2010 20:09, Reinier Zwitserloot < > [email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> In theory, they wouldn't come, as that's legit according to > the > > > > > > >> license. You do have to give full credit and you'd have to > release > > > > it > > > > > > >> under the GPL as well. > > > > > > > > >> IANAL. > > > > > > > > >> On Sep 9, 8:38 pm, Jan Goyvaerts <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > >> > I know there has been *many* messages already about last day > > > > events > > > > > > >> > regarding to the future of Java. Although certainly inspired > by > > > > it, I > > > > > > >> have a > > > > > > >> > question that is not about Java or any other language. So > please, > > > > > > >> *don't* waste > > > > > > >> > this thread into something else. Thanks. > > > > > > >> > * > > > > > > >> > * > > > > > > >> > * * > > > > > > >> > Suppose I want to create a new programming language PL/2, > whatever > > > > my > > > > > > >> > reasons for that... > > > > > > > > >> > 1) I download OpenJDK (I know it's great). > > > > > > >> > 2) I rename every "java" into "pl2". (I know I can't call it > > > > "Java"). > > > > > > >> > 3) I republish the thing as an open source project OpenPL2. > > > > > > > > >> > How fast can I expect lawyers to knock on my door ? > > > > > > > > >> -- > > > > > > >> 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> > > > > <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com> > > > > > > >> . > > > > > > >> For more options, visit this group at > > > > > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Kevin Wright > > > > > > > > > mail / gtalk / msn : [email protected] > > > > > > > pulse / 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]<javaposse%[email protected]> > <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com> > > > > <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com> > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > > > > > > -- > > > > 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. > > -- > 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. > > -- 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.
