24 ms·
>Their contention is that they don't need one. Besides, they don't use Java- They use Dalvik and a JVM bytecode-to-Dalvik translator. Google's lawyers are goin
by jimmyvanhalen 14y ago
>Their contention is that they don't need one. Besides, they don't use Java- They use Dalvik and a JVM bytecode-to-Dalvik translator.
Google's lawyers are going to have a hard time convincing the jury.
Check out Oracle's slides.
http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/features/opening-slides-1592541.pdf http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/features/opening-slides-1...
slide 90:
What Google Said Before Lawsuit
Jul 26, 2005: “Must take license from Sun”
Oct 11, 2005: “We’ll pay Sun for the license and the TCK”
“We are making Java central to our solution”
Feb 10, 2006: “helping negotiate with my old team at Sun for a critical license”
Mar 24, 2006: “Java.lang api’s are copyrighted”
Sept 28, 2006: “Leverage Java for its existing base of developers”
Nov 6, 2007: “Is Android Java compatible?...No.”
Nov 17, 2007: “Scrub out a few more J’s”
Mar 24, 2008: “Please don’t demonstrate to any sun employees or lawyers”
Aug 5, 2009: “How aggressive do we scrub the J word?”
Aug 6, 2010: “technical alternatives…to Java for Android…suck” “we need to negotiate a license for Java under the terms we need”
Oct 13, 2011: “Android is hugely profitable”
- ajross 14y agoJuries decide on facts, though, not laws. They can determine whether or not Google thought a license was required, but it's the judge (or more likely an appellate court) who will decide whether it actually was.