decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Day 5 - Oracle v. Google Trial ~pj | 237 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Using vs Implementing: Not so different.
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 21 2012 @ 03:47 AM EDT
But, if this case goes in favor of Oracle and the decision survives appeal, Both
Using and reimplementing would require a license from the author of the API to
do, and your work would become a derivative work, whose continued distribution
depended on the holding of a license to do so from the author of the API.
Spend millions of dollars writing $software in $language. $language.author finds
that you have breached one of the esoteric terms of your license to $language,
so you can no longer sell your $software. THAT is what we could be heading for.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Day 5 - Oracle v. Google Trial ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 21 2012 @ 04:13 AM EDT
That's the beauty on this: SUN only managed the companies to make JAVA
cross-platform without SUN writing implementations, they wrote the JVM reference
implementation for desktop but they didn't wrote the implementation made by
mobile companies, also it's presumible that most of the JVM porting to other
processors was not made by SUN.

The reason why SUN went against Microsoft was because they were selling MS-VM as
JVM, they used the JAVA logo without producing JAVA compatible code a different
story when they launched J# which made the same (migrate from JAVA to Win32) but
without the legal burden of the JAVA compliance.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )