4 ms·

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....

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....