4 ms·
>are we no violating their copyright just by implementing their API? OpenJDK is GPL. If you comply with GPL, no. This is the problem, Google copied and did not
by danjoc 9y ago
>are we no violating their copyright just by implementing their API?
OpenJDK is GPL. If you comply with GPL, no. This is the problem, Google copied and did not comply with the GPL. Their other option was to pay Oracle/Sun a licensing fee for a commercial license. This is exactly the business model many GPL users follow. Ruling otherwise makes this business model invalid, but it also creates a double standard.
Consider a programming language where you program in types, like Idris. The case is more obvious here. The API is a program. The same applies to Java too, but that seems less obvious. The API is the program that produces compiler output.
- djsumdog 9y agoHuh .. so why doesn't Google just release their Android Java runtime under the GPL? Seems like an easy win all the way around? I thought the OpenJDK people needed certain concessions to release their VM under the GPL?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- icebraining 9y agoSupposedly, they are switching to OpenJDK. But that doesn't erase their past infringement.
- icebraining 9y agoThis is exactly the business model many GPL users follow. GPL users charge money for a license on the implementation, not on the API. Or do you know any charging a license for the API itself?