Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 9th Nov 2010 22:28 UTC, submitted by fran
Java "Charging that Oracle has willfully disregarded the licensing terms for its own Java technology, the Apache Software Foundation has called upon other members of the Java Community Process (JCP) to vote against the next proposed version of the language, should Oracle continue to impose restrictions on open-source Java use. The nonprofit organization has also indicated that it could end its involvement in the JCP if the licensing restrictions stay in place."
Order by: Score:
I think that...
by Tuishimi on Tue 9th Nov 2010 22:50 UTC
Tuishimi
Member since:
2005-07-06

Oracle doesn't really care what anyone else thinks.

Reply Score: 15

RE: I think that...
by Macrat on Tue 9th Nov 2010 22:59 UTC in reply to "I think that..."
Macrat Member since:
2006-03-27

Oracle doesn't really care what anyone else thinks.


Exactly.

A strongly worded post isn't "war."

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: I think that...
by JAlexoid on Tue 9th Nov 2010 23:11 UTC in reply to "RE: I think that..."
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Exactly.

A strongly worded post isn't "war."


Urging JCP members to block is "war".
And this is not very good... For Java. And Oracle should know this. So far this is the worst news out there concerning Java. (After Oracle acquires Sun....)

Edited 2010-11-09 23:11 UTC

Reply Score: 6

I Support ASF
by prudhvi on Tue 9th Nov 2010 23:29 UTC
prudhvi
Member since:
2010-08-21

I Support ASF in this regard.

Reply Score: 2

I doubt this will do anything
by Moochman on Wed 10th Nov 2010 00:26 UTC
Moochman
Member since:
2005-07-06

It's really too bad Apache has to go through with such drastic tactics to make a point. Sadly, it probably won't matter. Unless IBM backs Apache up, the Java 7 vote will probably go through anyway, and then what? Apache gets out of the JCP, Harmony dies, maybe some kind of legal action ensues.... Most likely plenty more stormy Java headlines ahead.

Reply Score: 4

broken_symlink Member since:
2005-07-06

Didn't IBM recently switch focus from harmony to openjdk?

Reply Score: 2

RE: I doubt this will do anything
by Ripples on Wed 10th Nov 2010 03:47 UTC in reply to "I doubt this will do anything"
Ripples Member since:
2005-07-06

I agree, its pretty rough. I guess if you want a robust, cross-platform solution free from lawsuits, you should just go with Mono.

(HAHA, I don't know if that will ever get old :-)

Reply Score: 3

Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24

I agree, its pretty rough. I guess if you want a robust, cross-platform solution free from lawsuits, you should just go with Mono.

Nah, the reason nobody has been sued is because nobody is using it. ;)

Reply Score: 9

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

While a good joke, I think that no one has figured out the Oracle angle on Mono. The Android lawsuit sorta revealed that Oracle considers microsoft to be a Java licensee that pays royalties for the Oracle patents on Java that dotNet framework uses. So Microsoft may never sue for Mono, but that doesn't mean that Oracle wont ( if anyone ever makes money off of it).

Reply Score: 6

Slambert666 Member since:
2008-10-30

So Microsoft may never sue for Mono, but that doesn't mean that Oracle wont ( if anyone ever makes money off of it).


True, It is quite obvious that with the patent promise for dotNET Microsoft cannot possibly sue Mono.

What is worse however is that Oracle is probably in a position to sue over any VM based language, including Python, Ruby, Lua, etc. Not just Mono.

Reply Score: 2

bhtooefr Member since:
2009-02-19

Well, there's UCSD Pascal and Smalltalk. They're ancient (UCSD Pascal came out in 1978, Smalltalk's VM came out in 1983,) but that means that they're safe, patent-wise.

Reply Score: 1

jgagnon Member since:
2008-06-24

What is worse however is that Oracle is probably in a position to sue over any VM based language, including Python, Ruby, Lua, etc. Not just Mono.


Not really, considering Python (for instance) was released before Java even started as a project within Sun. Ruby started much later, but interpreted languages have been around a LONG time, so I can't see any such lawsuit standing up in court for long.

Reply Score: 1

ephracis Member since:
2007-09-23

Except for the fact that Python has changed. Who knows if something new in Python 3, for example, violates a patent held by Oracle?

Reply Score: 2

werterr Member since:
2006-10-03

I wonder... guess that's the problem when you base your foundation (Python Software Foundation) in the US.

Think (not a lawyer here) that most of these patents aren't worth the paper there printed on in Europe. So maybe the PSF should move back to Amsterdam...

So they would be safe(r) of the claws of 3v1l 0r4cl3.

Reply Score: 1

gnufreex Member since:
2010-05-06

True, It is quite obvious that with the patent promise for dotNET Microsoft cannot possibly sue Mono.

Microsoft patent promise is worth nothing, and it only includes subsets of .NET. Mono have gone far beyond promised part. De Icaza promised last year to make mono distribution with only those parts that are under Microsoft's false promise, but he realized that such piece of software would be unusable and it would show how dangerous Mono is. So he gave up, because he can't continue lying that Mono is safe if he actually shows that only small subset is under Microsoft's fake promise.

Also, even if such subset of Mono is used, that doesn't protect you from Microsoft's trolls like Paul Allen. Microsoft could just give a patent to Traul Allen and let him go wild against GNU/Linux distributors that ship Mono. Fake promise only implies that Microsoft won't sue, doesn't say anything about Traul Allen or Nathan Myhrvold, or Accacia(accacia already sued Red Hat for bogus patents).

Reply Score: 3

Slambert666 Member since:
2008-10-30

Microsoft patent promise is worth nothing, and it only includes subsets of .NET. Mono have gone far beyond promised part. De Icaza promised last year to make mono distribution with only those parts that are under Microsoft's false promise, but he realized that such piece of software would be unusable and it would show how dangerous Mono is. So he gave up, because he can't continue lying that Mono is safe if he actually shows that only small subset is under Microsoft's fake promise.

Also, even if such subset of Mono is used, that doesn't protect you from Microsoft's trolls like Paul Allen. Microsoft could just give a patent to Traul Allen and let him go wild against GNU/Linux distributors that ship Mono. Fake promise only implies that Microsoft won't sue, doesn't say anything about Traul Allen or Nathan Myhrvold, or Accacia(accacia already sued Red Hat for bogus patents).


Dude, pretty much everything you say here is not just wrong, but factually wrong, and a quick Google would have told you so.

You must remember the key to good propaganda, FUD and other misrepresentations is to at least get some of the facts right before you switch.

Reply Score: 1

gnufreex Member since:
2010-05-06

Maybe you should have used google instead of ad hominem.

For example, here is one article about De Icaza's avoidance to make ECMA/cp covered Mono distribution:
http://www.itwire.com/opinion-and-analysis/open-sauce/42394-where-o...

He promised that, now he avoids it.

And here is world's biggest patent troll, Nathan Myrhwold http://www.intellectualventures.com/Home.aspx

He is ex-Microsoftie like Traul Allen, and he too attacks Microsoft's competitors, except he often gives patents to "partners" (read: other trolls) to do dirty work.

Oh, and here are Microsoft statements wrt patents and openness of .NET: http://www.the-source.com/open-source-at-microsoft/open-source-at-m...

This statement is very interesting:

“If someone implemented a product that conforms to the specification, we believe we have a patent or one pending that’s essential to implementing the specification.”

Any defence of Mono is frivolous. It is in worse position than Dalvik, and it is put there on purpose by De Icaza, to advance Microsoft agenda. Only reason why Mono is not under legal pressure right now is fact that nobody important use it. Value of Microsoft Mono patents increase as importance and number open source Mono applications increase. When they decide it is hight enough, they will sue.

Reply Score: 2

War? No, just an announcement
by pica on Wed 10th Nov 2010 09:44 UTC
pica
Member since:
2005-07-10

But, what will Oracle do if Apache changes their licence in a way it is still open but not suitable for Oracle. They just have to make their licence even more "viral" than the original GPL.

Greetings,
pica

Reply Score: 1

RE: War? No, just an announcement
by vivainio on Wed 10th Nov 2010 09:48 UTC in reply to "War? No, just an announcement"
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

But, what will Oracle do if Apache changes their licence in a way it is still open but not suitable for Oracle.


Why would Oracle care how Apache licenses their software?

Reply Score: 2

Simply because Oracle uses ...
by pica on Wed 10th Nov 2010 10:22 UTC in reply to "RE: War? No, just an announcement"
pica Member since:
2005-07-10

... a damn lot of Apache code in their products. An apache webserver as example is part of the Oracle rDBMS.

pica

Reply Score: 3

RE: Simply because Oracle uses ...
by de_wizze on Thu 11th Nov 2010 15:32 UTC in reply to "Simply because Oracle uses ..."
de_wizze Member since:
2005-10-31

Or move closer to IBM who if I'm not mistaken have their own web server.

Reply Score: 2

All I can say
by vodoomoth on Wed 10th Nov 2010 10:42 UTC
vodoomoth
Member since:
2010-03-30

is that it makes me wanna puke.

What does "Should Java 7 get voted down [...]" mean anyway?

EDIT: forgot to say that given the amount of JEE software under the Apache umbrella, I think it would not be a good thing for Oracle to lose the ASF participation... or would it?

Edited 2010-11-10 10:46 UTC

Reply Score: 3

Bright Side
by snadrus on Wed 10th Nov 2010 17:54 UTC
snadrus
Member since:
2010-05-04

This could bring a new age of compiled + web content:

Vala/Genie are compiled, Gnome-targeted Mono-like languages competing against Mono. They should gain respectability.

Google's Go language made it to GCC now, and Apple's GCD multiprocessing toolset will easily beat Java's multithreading work.

Much of HTML5 requires application developers which have been in Javaland-on-Apple for a while.

These and other tools were ignored but are open, safer, and here-to-stay. What better way to get them traction than to showcase the benefits of their freedom.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Bright Side
by Moochman on Wed 10th Nov 2010 18:00 UTC in reply to "Bright Side"
Moochman Member since:
2005-07-06

Java is compiled.

I guess you mean "platform-native" binaries? Sorry, but those don't sound very much like web-friendly technologies to me. The platform independence is one of the main reasons Java (and PHP) became so big on the web in the first place.

Reply Score: 2

purplemecha
Member since:
2010-05-27

Oracle could have taken a tremendous leadership role in the free software community. With their backing we could have seen a flowering of Java and OpenOffice.org. It's sad that they have chosen the path of not working with the free software community at large. I had such high hopes when they bought Sun. I was hoping Solaris would become revitalized and OpenOffice.org could finally be able to catch up and exceed Microsoft Office. I really hope Oracle changes their tune, they could be such a powerful force for good in open source.

Reply Score: 3

werterr Member since:
2006-10-03

I agree it's sad news...

Considering previous products that Oracle got there hands on it does not look good for Java ;)

Guess Oracle will want to close it down, create there own 'enterprise' edition make sure that OpenJDK get's everything about 1 year later then there 'enterprise' edition. Limit amount of resources free-java can sure on your system, or maybe put tons of advertising in awt/swing ?

All that you are pushed further into buying there enterprise edition.

On similar note, anybody else found OpenJDK to be pretty crash/segfault happy ?

Well maybe this is for the better. Maybe now people will start looking at other languages now besides Java and C#.

Finally given them the credits they deserve in the 'enterprisy' world.

Guess it's a bit like Linux... it runs in almost any home now... your wireless router, your hd-tv, even the big coffee machine at work runs embedded linux. And nobody knows or cares about it..

Likewise I've been working on some high ends switches lately which run there entire management tools on a embedded Linux system with Python, such that you can now completely tune and develop for your switches.

Maybe life programming 'enterprise' applications will become a lot more fun because of Oracle ;)

Reply Score: 1

siki_miki Member since:
2006-01-17

They are asking for another fork. Java is too important to be manipulated by Oracle, and it _is_ released as GPL - the genie is out of the bottle.

Seeing how Sun went down while they didn't earn much money on Java, and since they (Oracle/Larry) couldn't care less about openess (even if proprietization means a slow death of the Java as a no.1 platform independent environment), it doesn't surprise that they are more interested in raising cash short term while Java is still popular everywhere, and used in a _lot_ of enterprise which will be able to cough up required money.

Yes, Sun/Oracle developer manpower will be missed in that case, and the GPL version probably has a few missing bits, but a few tech giants will without doubt stand behind the forked version and supply funds and manpower. GPL is one-way decision and Sun did that for a reason (to save Java if they get acquired).

Reply Score: 2

VirtualBox
by OSGuy on Thu 11th Nov 2010 09:52 UTC
OSGuy
Member since:
2006-01-01

I am starting to get worried about VirtualBox. I wonder what will happen to it.

Reply Score: 3

Sun / IBM
by OSGuy on Thu 11th Nov 2010 09:57 UTC
OSGuy
Member since:
2006-01-01

From the moment the IBM / Sun deal failed, I knew this can't be good.

Edited 2010-11-11 09:57 UTC

Reply Score: 3