5 ms·

I think it's a reasonable interpretation and I agree with GP. APIs used to be seen as fair use and a way to compete, in the similar way to how IBM-compatibles a

I think it's a reasonable interpretation and I agree with GP. APIs used to be seen as fair use and a way to compete, in the similar way to how IBM-compatibles are seen. However, when it became clear to Oracle that there is money to be had, they changed the very definition of copyright to get their fill. What's to say they wont mutate some other aspect of IP law in the future just to make you liable like they did with google? If you're big enough, they will come after you. I think it's perfectly rational - and i'd argue smart - to cut them off early before it's too late.

pjmlp 8y ago
Google had the opportunity to buy Sun after screwing it up and preferred not to. "Triangulation 245: James Gosling" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYw3X4RZv6Y&feature=youtu.be&t=57m42s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYw3X4RZv6Y&feature=youtu.be... If IBM had not given up to buy Sun, I am pretty sure they would have done likewise. Plenty of JVM vendors are selling their versions without getting into trouble by playing by the rules. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Java_virtual_machines#Active_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Java_virtual_machines#...
- icebraining 8y ago
  I'm not sure this is relevant; regardless of Google's actions, trying to make APIs copyrightable is a dangerous abuse of the system.
- v_lisivka 8y ago
  So, if I want to ship with OpenJDK, I will need to buy Sun? And if I want to ship with Wine, I will need to buy M$?
  - pjmlp 8y ago
    If you ship 100% of OpenJDK no, which Google is yet to do.