|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 23 2012 @ 07:36 PM EDT |
ok, this is an irrefutable point you make:
"a programmer would tell you that the explanatory text is a vital part of
an API"
How to get around it...?
It seems you accept the core argument that we have legally got our raw list
using the 'Reflection Mechanism' on an icedTea binary. AND our raw API is public
domain - not GPL.
But no programmer can use our raw API because its not documented. And it will be
hard/impossible for a Harmony coder to comment and implement a compatible API
from just this raw list...
Well just let them read the icedTea, openJDK source. There is no EULA to agree
to because openJDK is published under GPL - which forbids any additional vendor
EULAs. The GPL certainly lets someone study it and read comments - just not to
copy unless the derrivative work is also under GPL. So while not public domain
the comments and inner-workings are available for a programmer to study - then
flesh out their own public-domain copy of the API - but using original code and
comments in their own words.
The new javaDoc explanatory text will convey the same information but in the
different words of a Harmony coder.
The GPL allows lots of user freedoms and protects lots of user rights. Oracle
distribute OpenJDK under GPL so Apache and Google have the right to study
openJDK. Just not copy any fragments,names,... EXCEPT for the raw APIs, class
hierarchy, package names, which are public domain anyway courtesy of reflection.
The final result: a public-domain Java API is not protected from Oracles patents
- but those are not proving very effective so-far.
OpenJDK is the gift that keeps giving - even to Harmony and Dalvik - just don't
copy and paste.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|