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
It's interesting the way the claims are being moved around during this ca | 380 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
It's interesting the way the claims are being moved around during this ca
Authored by: darrellb on Thursday, May 24 2012 @ 04:25 PM EDT
Oracle complains about fragmenting Java, which by their own definition of
fragment has not occurrred.

By Oracle's definition of fragmentation, the fact that applications won't
necessarily run across different Java platforms does not constitute
fragmentation.

If Google licensed Java and built Android as a Java branded platform Oracle
would claim that Android did not fragment Java any more than the other
incompatible Java platforms do.
Android applications would no more be able to run on a J2EE platform than a JME
application would.

So why is Oracle claiming that Android, a platform that has never claimed to be
Java, fragments Java when Oracle's own incompatible Java platforms don't?

Obviously, the answer isn't becuase Oracle is concerned about Java
fragmentation. The answer is becuase Oracle has been unable to make money from
Android.

[ 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 )