Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 16th Sep 2012 16:53 UTC
Google There's a bit of a story going on between Google, Acer, and Alibaba, a Chinese mobile operating system vendor. Acer wanted to ship a device with Alibaba's operating system, but Google asked them not to, and Acer complied. The reason is that Acer is a member of the Open Handset Alliance, which prohibits the promotion of non-standard Android implementations - exactly what Alibaba is shipping. On top of that, Alibaba's application store hosts pirated Android applications, including ones from Google.
Permalink for comment 535485
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Wait a minute
by chithanh on Mon 17th Sep 2012 17:36 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Wait a minute"
chithanh
Member since:
2006-06-18

Like I said, page 81 of Oracle's opening statement slideshow contains snippets of code that were copied unmodified from Java into Android. So fork, even by that strict definition, is partially true, just as reimplementation by a strict definition is only partially true, as it wasn't done cleanly.

Indeed two instances of copying were part of the lawsuit: One was deemed so insignificant that the judge doubted even its copyrightability. The other was never part of any shipped Android device. This does not qualify as fork in any sensible way.

One commenter on Andy Rubin's Google+ post explained it through examples:

Apache Harmony is an implementation of Java
Mono is an implementation of .NET
LibreOffice is a fork of OpenOffice.org
X.org is a fork of XFree86

I hope it is more clear now.

They also establish that Google's explicit goal was to get Java technology without accepting Sun's terms, which is precisely what they're now accusing Alibaba of doing, while simultaneously maintaining the narrative that Android is not proprietary.

Alibaba using Android code is no problem, the license allows that. Amazon and BlackBerry do it too. But Acer cannot make incompatible products from Android code as long as they are member of the OHA.

Edited 2012-09-17 17:37 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2