Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 28th Oct 2010 20:07 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Legal Now, this is an interesting development in the ongoing war against Android. Oracle didn't just sue Google for allegedly infringing its Java patents; it also claimed copyright infringement. Oracle has amended its complaint, and, fair is fair, they've got the code to prove it: indeed, Android contains code that appears to be copied verbatim from Java - mind you, appears. However, the code in question comes straight from Apache's Harmony project, which raises the question - would a respected and long-established cornerstone of the open source world really accept tainted code in the first place?
Thread beginning with comment 447511
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
So Android
by rubberneck on Thu 28th Oct 2010 21:12 UTC
rubberneck
Member since:
2009-06-16

...copies feature for feature, and line for line. I know this site ardently defends android, but sooner or later people have to take their heads out of the sand.

Reply Score: -1

RE: So Android
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 28th Oct 2010 21:16 in reply to "So Android"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

You didn't read. Android didn't copy it. Harmony did (if true). Google only copied it from Harmony, probably assuming the code was clean because it's Apache's. We might want to wait for a response from Apache.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: So Android
by werpu on Thu 28th Oct 2010 21:26 in reply to "RE: So Android"
werpu Member since:
2006-01-18

Without checking the code did it occur to anyone that it might have been an inverse order that the jdk copied the code from harmony.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: So Android
by Almafeta on Fri 29th Oct 2010 17:39 in reply to "RE: So Android"
Almafeta Member since:
2007-02-22

Google only copied it from Harmony, probably assuming the code was clean because it's Apache's.


If only Google had access to some sort of search device that searched through open-source projects. A "Google Codesearch," if you will.

But who could invent such a crazy moon gadget?

Edited 2010-10-29 17:43 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

Epic fail.
by n0xx on Fri 29th Oct 2010 05:39 in reply to "So Android"
n0xx Member since:
2005-07-12

I don't defend android. I defend the right of coders to do the right tool for the job. Software patents are stupid. Patenting concepts is as stupid as snorting uranium or cranial intrusion. What's the point of charging someone from using... say... sorting algorithms?

"Method for sorting data according to explicit numeric value".

There... No more sorting algorithms. If you want to sort stuff... well.. to f--king bad. Pay up or shut up. Because that's what it is about.

And yes, I know sorting algorithms aren't patented, but other algorithms are. Stuff like image and video encoding come to mind. How about patenting some DSP algorithms or FFT? Why not? There's money to be made! f--k the industry, f--k technology, f--k science. This is capitalisms baby!

You seem to be taking a stand for software patents and how "Google is clearly ripping of Apple/Microsoft because OMG Android UI is so f--king similar to iOS or Windows Mobile and they must be sued because of it hurd durr".

Yet i bet you're posting this comment on a OS which has a GUI. GUIs where invented by Xerox. Apple ripped off Xerox when they first developed MacOS System ? (I dunno).. and MS ripped off apple. Where would we be now if they hadn't done so? Snail much?

Why are MS and Apple the only ones entitled to rip people off? Are they God made corporation?

Addendum: I find hilarious that neither MS nor Apple even dare to look funny at IBM. You know why? Because IBM is the Big Daddy of computing patents. Every single one of their products infringes IBM patents. Yet Big Blue doesn't do shit about it. Know why? Because they are old enough to know how to adapt their business model to the market. They don't try to coerce the market into doing their bidding. They play ball. And that's the way it should be.

That is all.

Edited 2010-10-29 05:43 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Epic fail.
by fury on Fri 29th Oct 2010 13:22 in reply to "Epic fail."
fury Member since:
2005-09-23

Except that in this case we're talking about copyright infringement, which any open source aficionado such as myself will tell you is always a Bad Thing (TM).

Basically, someone needed an implementation of this class and decided to just use automated tools to extract (read: steal) source code from one of the official Java implementations. And the evidence is clear that this is what happened.

Who really did it is the question we need to ask.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Epic fail.
by hscottyh on Fri 29th Oct 2010 21:21 in reply to "Epic fail."
hscottyh Member since:
2010-10-29

Copyrights and patents are not capitalism. They are protectionism, corporatism, fascism, or if you have use the word capitalism; it's crony capitalism.

True capitalism would not allow for one company to have a monopoly over another through coercion of the state.

True capitalism is a beautiful thing. The word is just misused today, the U.S. hasn't seen true capitalism in a long long time if ever.

Sorry for the rant, I just get tired of people calling corporatism capitalism. They are not even close. The customer is king with capitalism. It's completely opposite with corporatism.

Reply Parent Score: 3