Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 13th Aug 2010 22:58 UTC, submitted by Alex Forster
Legal We're far from done with the Oracle v. Google lawsuit. The search giant has responded to the lawsuit, and Miguel De Icaza has provided a very interesting insight into the case. His report has been confirmed by James Gosling, known as the father of Java who left Sun right after the merger. Icaza speculates that the potential to monetise on Java by suing Google was pitched by Jonathan Schwartz during Sun's sales talks with Oracle. Oh boy.
Thread beginning with comment 436735
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
People forget
by Windows Sucks on Sat 14th Aug 2010 00:15 UTC
Windows Sucks
Member since:
2005-11-10

That Sun sued MS for almost the same thing and won big time. Oracle might be wrong in a lot off peoples eyes on this, legally they got pretty good feet to stand on!

Reply Score: 1

RE: People forget
by Hiev on Sat 14th Aug 2010 00:21 in reply to "People forget"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

Yeah and by that time it was moraly aproved but now don't.

Double standar sucks.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: People forget
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 14th Aug 2010 00:28 in reply to "People forget"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Educate yourself. This case has barely ANYTHING in common with the MS suit. It's pretty simple stuff, actually.

http://www.osnews.com/story/23682/Details_from_Oracle_s_Complaint_A...

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: People forget
by Windows Sucks on Sat 14th Aug 2010 00:37 in reply to "RE: People forget"
Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

I did educate myself. The only difference in the case is that Sun sued for breach of contract and Oracle is directly suing for Patent violation. But the reasoning is the same:

Fragmenting the Java platform;
Flooding the market with incompatible Java Runtime Environments;
Forcing other companies to distribute or use products that are incompatible with Java;
Significantly limiting Sun's distribution channels for the Java Runtime Environment;
Intentionally interfering with the development of Java-based applications for compatible runtimes;
Copyright infringement resulting from Microsoft's distribution of an unlicensed implementation of the Java Runtime Environment;
Intentional creation of incompatibilities between Microsoft software and competing technologies, thereby raising switching costs for consumers and reducing consumer choice.

Basically MS did the same thing as Google did. Microsoft did it after licensing Java. Google just straight up did it. LOL!

I am sure if this makes it to court (Which I doubt will happen) Oracle will pull this out!

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: People forget
by sithlord2 on Sat 14th Aug 2010 09:47 in reply to "RE: People forget"
sithlord2 Member since:
2009-04-02

Ok, I'm trying to figure out what the lawsuit is about.

According to the article you linked, Google took "bits and pieces" of Java, threw in their own stuff, and stuck the "Java"-label on it. In my opinion, this does violate some laws.

For example: When I take a Sony TV, and a I start replacing some parts which other parts I have lying around in my basement. Then, I start selling these TV's in stores as "Sony" TV's... I think this does violate copyright laws, and could even be considered forgery in some countries...

Reply Parent Score: 1