Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 13th Aug 2010 22:58 UTC, submitted by Alex Forster
Permalink for comment 436817
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-10-02
There are no Java libraries in Dalvik. There are libraries with the same names (and to some extend same method names), but that's also the case in Kaffe.
A programming language is not protected against copying. The implementation of interpreter/compiler is protected by copyright and documentation can be protected by copyright, but the programming language itself is not protected. So it is irrelevant that the language closely resembles Java. What matters is whether the clone violates patents and whether Google has been using code from Oracle without license. The latter is not the case, unless Apache Harmony is in violation too. Trademarks are irrelevant here, since Google isn't claiming Dalvik is Java. Neither is the developers of Kaffe. Dalvik isn't even compatible, and contains none of the Java libraries. It contains some libraries with some of the same names and some of the same method names, implemented without any code owned by Oracle.
The only thing left is violation of software patents. That remains to be seen.