3 ms·

IIRC, Google copy/pasted code from Apache Harmony which wasn't legal itself. edit: http://www.groklaw.net/pdf3/OraGoogle-959.pdf http://www.groklaw.net/pdf3/O

IIRC, Google copy/pasted code from Apache Harmony which wasn't legal itself. edit: http://www.groklaw.net/pdf3/OraGoogle-959.pdf http://www.groklaw.net/pdf3/OraGoogle-959.pdf "Two of the three questions from the jurors have focused on Apache, but the issue is actually very simple: Apache never obtained any license from Sun permitting its use of the Java specifications for Harmony. As made clear by Apache itself, Apache never had a license from Sun or Oracle for Harmony. Apache had no rights to Java technology that it could give to Google. This not even a case in which there is a “cloud over Apache,” to use the Court’s phrase (4/20/2012 Trial Tr. 1114:16-20). Apache simply had no title at all, and has publicly conceded as much: When Apache resigned from the JCP in protest based on its inability to obtain a license, it stated in its resignation that the “Java specifications are proprietary technology that must be licensed directly from the spec lead under whatever terms the spec lead chooses.” (TX 1045 at p. 2.) Thus, Google’s use of Apache Harmony provides no defense for Google. Oracle seeks an instruction to the jury that will prevent confusion and clarify that Google’s use of Harmony provides no defense to Oracle’s copyright infringement claims."

curt15 7y ago
>"When Apache resigned from the JCP in protest based on its inability to obtain a license..." Wasn't Apache seeking a license for a collection of tests, not the right to implement the API itself? And what, under Oracle's argument, would be the legal status of GNU GCJ/Classpath?
- monocasa 7y ago
  Apache was seeking the ability to access the tests, as passing those tests were the requirement to call it Java. Sun was using trademark (not copyright over API sequence structure and organization) to enforce this, sort of how Firefox does. I'd imagine that Oracle sees GCJ/classpath as infringing, but there's not enough money in enforcing that to be worth it. That's all gut feeling though, and I don't know of any information that'd let us confirm one way or another.

curt15 7y ago

>"When Apache resigned from the JCP in protest based on its inability to obtain a license..." Wasn't Apache seeking a license for a collection of tests, not the right to implement the API itself? And what, under Oracle's argument, would be the legal status of GNU GCJ/Classpath?

monocasa 7y ago
Apache was seeking the ability to access the tests, as passing those tests were the requirement to call it Java. Sun was using trademark (not copyright over API sequence structure and organization) to enforce this, sort of how Firefox does. I'd imagine that Oracle sees GCJ/classpath as infringing, but there's not enough money in enforcing that to be worth it. That's all gut feeling though, and I don't know of any information that'd let us confirm one way or another.