6 ms·

Not a Java dev but what are these proprietary Java APIs? doesn't oracle jdk and openjdk share the same APIs?

cpncrunch 11y ago
I think the article is incorrect. I suspect they meant "implementation" rather than "APIs". As I understand it, OpenJDK has the same APIs (otherwise Google wouldn't be able to just switch to OpenJDK).
benwilber0 11y ago
from my understanding, openjdk is insulated from the supposed copyrighted api issue, though they still struggle with obtaining a test suite that can certify their implementation as "compatible", to some degree or another.
- icebraining 11y ago
  No, OpenJDK is the actual reference implementation. It's Apache Harmony that couldn't get the TDK.
  - benwilber0 11y ago
    ah, thanks for the clarification
  - igravious 11y ago
    So why didn't they go this direction at the start?
    - Reason077 11y ago
      OpenJDK didn't exist in the early days of Android, so it wasn't an option. Sun/Oracle created OpenJDK, effectively "open sourcing" Java in response to the popularity of clean-room Java reimplementations like GNU Classpath and Apache Harmony. Why Android did not choose to adopt OpenJDK until now, however, is a mystery known only to Google. Maybe it was just a lot of work, technically speaking, to do so.
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
bitmapbrother 11y ago
The article is a trainwreck. There is no difference between the Oracle Java API's and the OpenJDK API's.
- mike_hearn 11y ago
  There are, actually. The Oracle JDK has some features that the OpenJDK does not. Look at the 'commercial features' to see what: examples include the resource management API, AppCDS, Flight Recorder, a few other things I forgot.
  - bitmapbrother 11y ago
    Yes, but the context of the article was in relation to the 37 API SSO's Oracle accused Google of copying.
    - AnimalMuppet 11y ago
      I think it's like this: Google copies Java's API. Oracle sues Google, claiming "You copied our API! It's copyright! You're infringing!" Google says, "Fine. We'll stop using your copyrighted API. We're going to copy the API of OpenJDK, which is GPLed so we're completely free to do so, and which just happens to have the exact same API. Good luck suing us for that one." And the actual Android API doesn't change...
      - Reason077 11y ago
        They're not "copying the OpenJDK API". They're changing the Android Java runtime to actually use OpenJDK rather than its own proprietary implementation of the Java APIs. Which is, perhaps, all that Oracle wanted all along. Ater all, everybody wins from this. - Android developers get up-to-date Java APIs that aren't years behind other Java platforms. - Google gets to spend its engineering resources on things that matter specifically to Android rather than endlessly duplicating, and playing catch-up, to the OpenJDK platform. - And Oracle gets a major industry player behind Java rather than fragmenting it and creating a slightly-incompatible variant.
mkonecny 11y ago
My exact thoughts as well. Perhaps they have to use OpenJDK instead of their own implementation in order to use the protected Java API?
nickpsecurity 11y ago
They do but there might be an important point embedded here. The OSS implementation is licensed for free use. That implies the API is authorized for that version. The two issues go hand in hand Im guessing.
orionblastar 11y ago
So far APIs cannot be copyrighted. There have been lawsuits over APIs but no decision that protects APIs from being used by other people and companies. GNU/Linux for example uses Unix APIs and Mac OSX uses Unix APIs, so if APIs are copyrighted then they would be sued for using the Unix APIs without permission. Then they would have to remove Unix APIs and lose Unix compatibility. Sun went after Microsoft and others over Java IP before Oracle bought them out. Sun used a lot of money on lawsuits and ended up losing money to the point that Oracle bought them out. This is the same as when SCO was suing over GNU/Linux using Unix source code. It usually doesn't work and costs more in court costs than any settlement or rewards.
- jrochkind1 11y ago
  > So far APIs cannot be copyrighted. There have been lawsuits over APIs but no decision that protects APIs from being used by other people and companies. So, are you not familiar with the very very pertinent to this _particular_ platform recent case of Oracle v. Google? Cause, yeah, that did that. It's a disaster.
  - orionblastar 11y ago
    I was not aware that Oracle won. Can Google appeal it?
    - AnimalMuppet 11y ago
      Google appealed to the Supreme Court. They declined to hear the case.
- tzs 11y ago
  > So far APIs cannot be copyrighted. There have been lawsuits over APIs but no decision that protects APIs from being used by other people and companies. What about the decision of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Oracle America, Inc. v. Google, Inc.? [1] [1] http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/content/oracle-america-inc-v-google-inc-opinion http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/content/oracle-america-inc-v-go...

I think the article is incorrect. I suspect they meant "implementation" rather than "APIs". As I understand it, OpenJDK has the same APIs (otherwise Google wouldn't be able to just switch to OpenJDK).

benwilber0 11y ago

from my understanding, openjdk is insulated from the supposed copyrighted api issue, though they still struggle with obtaining a test suite that can certify their implementation as "compatible", to some degree or another.

icebraining 11y ago
No, OpenJDK is the actual reference implementation. It's Apache Harmony that couldn't get the TDK.
- benwilber0 11y ago
  ah, thanks for the clarification
- igravious 11y ago
  So why didn't they go this direction at the start?
  - Reason077 11y ago
    OpenJDK didn't exist in the early days of Android, so it wasn't an option. Sun/Oracle created OpenJDK, effectively "open sourcing" Java in response to the popularity of clean-room Java reimplementations like GNU Classpath and Apache Harmony. Why Android did not choose to adopt OpenJDK until now, however, is a mystery known only to Google. Maybe it was just a lot of work, technically speaking, to do so.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]

bitmapbrother 11y ago

The article is a trainwreck. There is no difference between the Oracle Java API's and the OpenJDK API's.

mike_hearn 11y ago
There are, actually. The Oracle JDK has some features that the OpenJDK does not. Look at the 'commercial features' to see what: examples include the resource management API, AppCDS, Flight Recorder, a few other things I forgot.
- bitmapbrother 11y ago
  Yes, but the context of the article was in relation to the 37 API SSO's Oracle accused Google of copying.
  - AnimalMuppet 11y ago
    I think it's like this: Google copies Java's API. Oracle sues Google, claiming "You copied our API! It's copyright! You're infringing!" Google says, "Fine. We'll stop using your copyrighted API. We're going to copy the API of OpenJDK, which is GPLed so we're completely free to do so, and which just happens to have the exact same API. Good luck suing us for that one." And the actual Android API doesn't change...
    - Reason077 11y ago
      They're not "copying the OpenJDK API". They're changing the Android Java runtime to actually use OpenJDK rather than its own proprietary implementation of the Java APIs. Which is, perhaps, all that Oracle wanted all along. Ater all, everybody wins from this. - Android developers get up-to-date Java APIs that aren't years behind other Java platforms. - Google gets to spend its engineering resources on things that matter specifically to Android rather than endlessly duplicating, and playing catch-up, to the OpenJDK platform. - And Oracle gets a major industry player behind Java rather than fragmenting it and creating a slightly-incompatible variant.

mkonecny 11y ago

My exact thoughts as well. Perhaps they have to use OpenJDK instead of their own implementation in order to use the protected Java API?

nickpsecurity 11y ago

They do but there might be an important point embedded here. The OSS implementation is licensed for free use. That implies the API is authorized for that version. The two issues go hand in hand Im guessing.

orionblastar 11y ago

So far APIs cannot be copyrighted. There have been lawsuits over APIs but no decision that protects APIs from being used by other people and companies. GNU/Linux for example uses Unix APIs and Mac OSX uses Unix APIs, so if APIs are copyrighted then they would be sued for using the Unix APIs without permission. Then they would have to remove Unix APIs and lose Unix compatibility. Sun went after Microsoft and others over Java IP before Oracle bought them out. Sun used a lot of money on lawsuits and ended up losing money to the point that Oracle bought them out. This is the same as when SCO was suing over GNU/Linux using Unix source code. It usually doesn't work and costs more in court costs than any settlement or rewards.

jrochkind1 11y ago
> So far APIs cannot be copyrighted. There have been lawsuits over APIs but no decision that protects APIs from being used by other people and companies. So, are you not familiar with the very very pertinent to this _particular_ platform recent case of Oracle v. Google? Cause, yeah, that did that. It's a disaster.
- orionblastar 11y ago
  I was not aware that Oracle won. Can Google appeal it?
  - AnimalMuppet 11y ago
    Google appealed to the Supreme Court. They declined to hear the case.
tzs 11y ago
> So far APIs cannot be copyrighted. There have been lawsuits over APIs but no decision that protects APIs from being used by other people and companies. What about the decision of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Oracle America, Inc. v. Google, Inc.? [1] [1] http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/content/oracle-america-inc-v-google-inc-opinion http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/content/oracle-america-inc-v-go...