What Orien said. Google's plan to make a feasible java implementation that runs the entire frontend of a phone by stripping out cruft was NEVER going to be possible with 'free' patent protection from Oracle - the only way to get it was to talk to Oracle and get an explicit contract spelling it out.
Looking at the actual patents oracle decided to sue Google with, here's a possible explanation for why Google went ahead with their plan anyway: These patents suck. They apply in the same sense patent trolls manage to make the most tedious of connections between their overly broad patent and some poor sap they are suing. In other words: Google may have come to the conclusion this set of 8 is Oracle's best shot, and thought it was too ridiculous for them to try. In that case they were wrong. Alternatively Google thought the quality of this set of 8 is sufficiently low for the triangle of risk of getting sued, cost to defend / license after getting sued, and odds of winning were the better bet compared to the cost of rolling their own language or trying to make a complete JDK work. Whatever the reason, we'll all be sorry if this goes to court and Oracle wins. The particular cause Oracle is using to sue Google is dynamite: If these patents are validated by such a major court case, Oracle can (in my non-lawyer opinion!) easily lean on Firefox, Opera, and Apple (Safari) to pay gigantic license fees for these patents, as they are in breach of some of these as well. So would many other projects, including many FOSS ones. Good outcomes would be: Google wins, _or_, oracle and google come to an understanding which is mostly favourable to google. Google losing would set a very bad precedent, and google signing an understanding which is clearly favouring oracle also sets a precedent: If google doesn't dare take this all the way to the courtroom, why should the mozilla foundation think they have the budget needed to do it? Even better outcome: Google and Oracle, as part of this patent war, all make nice, realize suing each other over patents is only going to make the lawyers rich, and perhaps ink a deal where Oracle injects java, and Google a bunch of cash, into a to be formed independent not- for-profit java foundation. Also, rainbows and unicorns. On Oct 8, 10:25 am, BoD <[email protected]> wrote: > =>http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/05/google-responds-to-oracles-android... > > I find this excerpt summarizes the situation very well: > > == > * Google uses a subset of the Apache Harmony Java implementation > in Android. > * Sun open-sourced Java Standard Edition under the GPL in 2006 and > 2007, but didn't include a patent or copyright license with the code. > In order to get that license, developers have to demonstrate > compatibility with the Java specification. > * The only way to demonstrate compatibility with the Java > specification is to use Sun's Technology Compatibility Kit, or TCK, > and Sun / Oracle and Apache have been bickering about the license for > the Java TCK, or JCK, for years. (That's putting it lightly, actually. > It's been more like a war.) > * The only license Sun ever offered Apache for the JCK included > significant "field of use" restrictions, including a restriction on > mobile phones. > * Because of these restrictions, Apache's never taken a JCK > license to test Harmony. > * Oracle used to be on Apache's side in demanding Sun loosen up > the JCK licensing restrictions, but that changed as soon as it bought > Sun out. > * Google thinks this is very bad, and that Oracle and Sun are just > big bullies who don't want Java to be open, even though being open is > super amazing. > == > > The article then has additional points that are less in favor of > Google ;) > > BoD -- 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.
