3 ms·
Microsoft had licensed Java, and had agreed to the terms of Sun's trademark license, including compatibility terms. Google avoided licensing Java entirely, hen
by gdwatson 12y ago
Microsoft had licensed Java, and had agreed to the terms of Sun's trademark license, including compatibility terms. Google avoided licensing Java entirely, hence the lawsuit.
- judk 12y agoBut licenses grant (limited) rights, not take rights way.
- lmm 12y agoMicrosoft was granted a right to use the Java trademarks under certain conditions - conditions which it then violated while continuing to use those trademarks, meaning it was violating Sun's Java trademark, not the copyright. Google avoids using the Java trademarks entirely. Trademark law is primarily to protect customers - people who bought "Microsoft Java" (yes, it was more complicated than handing cash to MS and getting Microsoft Java, but the point stands) thought they were getting Java, and they weren't (the whole point of Java was "write once, run anywhere", but programs written under Microsoft Java often wouldn't run on Sun Java). Whereas there is no such confusion when people buy "Google Dalvik".