4 ms·

Whether usage is commercial or not is a big part of the first factor in the fair use test: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#1._Purpose_and_character_of_th

Whether usage is commercial or not is a big part of the first factor in the fair use test: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#1._Purpose_and_character_of_the_use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#1._Purpose_and_charac... You could arguably implement Java without a license from Oracle provided you were using the GPL, as OpenJDK is released under the JDK, and presumably includes the entire Java API. The problem for Google, of course, is OEMs would've balked at being forced to open source all of their proprietary modifications to Android. Wikipedia says the OpenJDK was released in 2007, so Google could've legally used the Java API under GPL terms, but chose not to, and also chose not to pay for Java licensing.

AstralStorm 6y ago
OpenJDK is not released under GPL, but a much more permissive license.
- pabs3 6y ago
  The OpenJDK license is GPLv2, with the ClassPath Exception: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenJDK https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenJDK
garaetjjte 6y ago
>would've balked at being forced to open source all of their proprietary modifications to Android OpenJDK have linking exception, so it doesn't apply. In fact Android uses OpenJDK now. It also makes Oracle case looks phoney, suing Google for Java usage while having released freely available OpenJDK. But that's not the point, I think implementing API/ABI/protocols/whatever should be allowed whether or not vendor wants it. There are many reimplementations of competitors APIs, and ruling in favor of Oracle would basically break that. Under that interpretation Wine would be in danger too, as significant part of Wine development is commercial (by CodeWeavers making their CrossOver product).
dragonwriter 6y ago
> You could arguably implement Java without a license from Oracle provided you were using the GPL So, as long as you are using it under the license Oracle offers it to you under, you could use it without a license from Oracle? I think that is inherently self-contradictory.

AstralStorm 6y ago

OpenJDK is not released under GPL, but a much more permissive license.

pabs3 6y ago
The OpenJDK license is GPLv2, with the ClassPath Exception: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenJDK https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenJDK

garaetjjte 6y ago

>would've balked at being forced to open source all of their proprietary modifications to Android OpenJDK have linking exception, so it doesn't apply. In fact Android uses OpenJDK now. It also makes Oracle case looks phoney, suing Google for Java usage while having released freely available OpenJDK. But that's not the point, I think implementing API/ABI/protocols/whatever should be allowed whether or not vendor wants it. There are many reimplementations of competitors APIs, and ruling in favor of Oracle would basically break that. Under that interpretation Wine would be in danger too, as significant part of Wine development is commercial (by CodeWeavers making their CrossOver product).

dragonwriter 6y ago

> You could arguably implement Java without a license from Oracle provided you were using the GPL So, as long as you are using it under the license Oracle offers it to you under, you could use it without a license from Oracle? I think that is inherently self-contradictory.