5 ms·

The roughly decade long copyright battle around Java API use has killed any interest I had in Java

by discordance 8y ago

maaaats 8y ago
Why? (Or why should we care about your personal interest in java without any substantial information?)
- discordance 8y ago
  I don’t believe in software patents, and Oracle’s litigious history indicates they are a strong proponent for software patents. I loved working with Java/Spring at one time, but there are too many good alternatives and I choose to vote with my feet.
  - pron 8y ago
    FYI, the company that extracted the most from Android through patent-related legal threats was Microsoft, that collected billions in patent royalties from Android vendors[1][2]. While more extensive, it generated less noise partly because the companies MS came after didn't have the same PR machine as the one Oracle came after... (a cynic would say that the result of the case was what would be expected from a battle between a company with a great legal department and a company with a great PR department). Large software companies (except MS) are far more often the target of patent infringement lawsuits/threats than the perpetrator. [1]: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2015/11/01/microsoft-android-patent-income/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2015/11/01/microsoft... [2]: https://www.howtogeek.com/183766/why-microsoft-makes-5-to-15-from-every-android-device-sold/ https://www.howtogeek.com/183766/why-microsoft-makes-5-to-15...
    - mycall 8y ago
      Microsoft has recently pledge their entire patent portfolio to the Linux system. That's not just the Linux kernel, but other packages built on it. I see this as a big change for them, since they need Linux on Azure.
    - curt15 8y ago
      It's not about the money. it's about the principle. For example, where does the copyright lawsuit leave Apache Harmony legally, given that it's an "unauthorized" Java API implementation? Is the codebase's Apache license still valid? If not, what does that say about the GPL license of GNU/Linux, which is similarly an "unauthorized" reimplementation of proprietary Unix?
      - pron 8y ago
        There was nothing in the lawsuit about being authorised or not. The court ruled that Google's particular use of the Java APIs was not fair use, as it wasn't intended for interop[1]. Apache Harmony can only license what they own, and they don't own the Java API. I guess that if you use Harmony in a way that makes fair use of the APIs you should be fine, but that's not what Google did (at least according to the court's ruling). [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_America,_Inc._v._Google,_Inc.#Appeals_Court_and_finding_of_non-fair-use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_America,_Inc._v._Google....
an_d_rew 8y ago
For me, it is because if I ever wanted to embrace and extend Java, even for a personal project, I would feel that I was putting myself into a state of legal jeopardy. You can argue all you want how I would be or I wouldn’t be, or that I would be fine as long as I didn’t call it Java, but as long as oracle remains super-litigatious... I would rather put my efforts elsewhere. (Would love to do or learn more about Graal, too, but... yuck. What am I going to get sued for if I re-implement any of it? No thanks.)
- pron 8y ago
  Even at the height of the court trial, even Google itself continued to use and fork OpenJDK (they rely on it heavily) and talk about it at Oracle[1]. OpenJDK is governed by its open-source license, which is GPLv2 (with the classpath extensions) -- just like Linux.[2] [1]: https://video.oracle.com/detail/videos/featured-videos/video/3731062156001/jvmls-2014:-jvm-at-google https://video.oracle.com/detail/videos/featured-videos/video... [2]: http://openjdk.java.net/legal/ http://openjdk.java.net/legal/
hota_mazi 8y ago
That's silly. OpenJDK has been around for years. There's also Kotlin.

The roughly decade long copyright battle around Java API use has killed any interest I had in Java

maaaats 8y ago

Why? (Or why should we care about your personal interest in java without any substantial information?)

discordance 8y ago
I don’t believe in software patents, and Oracle’s litigious history indicates they are a strong proponent for software patents. I loved working with Java/Spring at one time, but there are too many good alternatives and I choose to vote with my feet.
- pron 8y ago
  FYI, the company that extracted the most from Android through patent-related legal threats was Microsoft, that collected billions in patent royalties from Android vendors[1][2]. While more extensive, it generated less noise partly because the companies MS came after didn't have the same PR machine as the one Oracle came after... (a cynic would say that the result of the case was what would be expected from a battle between a company with a great legal department and a company with a great PR department). Large software companies (except MS) are far more often the target of patent infringement lawsuits/threats than the perpetrator. [1]: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2015/11/01/microsoft-android-patent-income/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2015/11/01/microsoft... [2]: https://www.howtogeek.com/183766/why-microsoft-makes-5-to-15-from-every-android-device-sold/ https://www.howtogeek.com/183766/why-microsoft-makes-5-to-15...
  - mycall 8y ago
    Microsoft has recently pledge their entire patent portfolio to the Linux system. That's not just the Linux kernel, but other packages built on it. I see this as a big change for them, since they need Linux on Azure.
  - curt15 8y ago
    It's not about the money. it's about the principle. For example, where does the copyright lawsuit leave Apache Harmony legally, given that it's an "unauthorized" Java API implementation? Is the codebase's Apache license still valid? If not, what does that say about the GPL license of GNU/Linux, which is similarly an "unauthorized" reimplementation of proprietary Unix?
    - pron 8y ago
      There was nothing in the lawsuit about being authorised or not. The court ruled that Google's particular use of the Java APIs was not fair use, as it wasn't intended for interop[1]. Apache Harmony can only license what they own, and they don't own the Java API. I guess that if you use Harmony in a way that makes fair use of the APIs you should be fine, but that's not what Google did (at least according to the court's ruling). [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_America,_Inc._v._Google,_Inc.#Appeals_Court_and_finding_of_non-fair-use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_America,_Inc._v._Google....

an_d_rew 8y ago

For me, it is because if I ever wanted to embrace and extend Java, even for a personal project, I would feel that I was putting myself into a state of legal jeopardy. You can argue all you want how I would be or I wouldn’t be, or that I would be fine as long as I didn’t call it Java, but as long as oracle remains super-litigatious... I would rather put my efforts elsewhere. (Would love to do or learn more about Graal, too, but... yuck. What am I going to get sued for if I re-implement any of it? No thanks.)

pron 8y ago
Even at the height of the court trial, even Google itself continued to use and fork OpenJDK (they rely on it heavily) and talk about it at Oracle[1]. OpenJDK is governed by its open-source license, which is GPLv2 (with the classpath extensions) -- just like Linux.[2] [1]: https://video.oracle.com/detail/videos/featured-videos/video/3731062156001/jvmls-2014:-jvm-at-google https://video.oracle.com/detail/videos/featured-videos/video... [2]: http://openjdk.java.net/legal/ http://openjdk.java.net/legal/

hota_mazi 8y ago

That's silly. OpenJDK has been around for years. There's also Kotlin.