Citing concerns about Oracle's lawsuit against it, Google said Friday it cannot participate in the upcoming JavaOne conference. The Oracle-sponsored JavaOne conference, formerly a Sun Microsystems event, is being held in San Francisco the week of September 19. Oracle is suing Google over alleged misuse of Java patents in the Android mobile platform. In a blog post, a Google official lamented the situation.

"We wish that we could [present at the show], but Oracle's recent lawsuit against Google and open source has made it impossible for us to freely share our thoughts about the future of Java and open source generally. This is a painful realization for us, as we've participated in every JavaOne since 2004, and I personally have spoken at all but the first in 1996," said Joshua Bloch of the Google Open Source Programs Office.

Read the whole article on:

http://infoworld.com/d/the-industry-standard/google-backs-out-javaone-conference-591

This will be my last JavaONE. Oracle blows. I have the feeling I am going to be accosted in every hallway by some dude wanting to sell me a Oracle DB support license. 

This will be my last JavaONE. Oracle blows. I have the feeling I am going to be accosted in every hallway by some dude wanting to sell me a Oracle DB support license. 

that's still better than IBM sales guys telling you to switch to DB2.

This will be my last JavaONE. Oracle blows. I have the feeling I am going to be accosted in every hallway by some dude wanting to sell me a Oracle DB support license. 

 

that's still better than IBM sales guys telling you to switch to DB2.

 

Lets face it - most of the big giants know how to make good software, but they still manage to sell their crap.

Coming to this thread- i think google should come up with java like language of their own. Microsoft did it with C# when J# came under same fire from SUN. So its not a big deal. Plus google is gettign itno so many things - devices, UI toolkits etc. They should have their own language. and google is still bit fater and agile. so this is the right time. 5 more years and google will be as slow as any other big giant.

Oracle is not a good company for any acquired software. Their sales guys are the worst - worst than car sales man.

EU was right when they had concerns on the merger . Good luck MySQL.  you are next on the chopping block. LAMP stack - you need to replace M now.  

 

"Coming to this thread- i think google should come up with java like language of their own."

Or they could just fully embrace Python on Android. It would be worth losing Java if it meant Oracle would be out of business.

I totally agree with this! Oracles sales guys always japed about open source. It is no open source company like Google.

Matt -

This will be my last JavaONE. Oracle blows. I have the feeling I am going to be accosted in every hallway by some dude wanting to sell me a Oracle DB support license.

You post is irrational, and borderline toolish.

Oracle salespeople each have their own specific accounts (not to mention difficult sales quotas), and they spend the entire conference in pre-planned meetings and events with those accounts. They would literally have nothing to gain even if they sold you something in a hallway (their commissions come only from their accounts). Your comment was both paranoid and degrading.

Thinking rationally: If the conference sucks, then you shouldn't come back. If the conference is good, and you're still using Java, then why wouldn't it be worth coming back?

Attempt some independent thought .. even if you decide to think for yourself, you can still rely on Google for search.

Peace,

Cameron Purdy | Oracle Coherence

http://coherence.oracle.com/

Cameron,

Thanks for sucking the fun out of the room with your passionate defense of your employer. 

For yours (and Tom Cruise's) sake, I will try to be less glib, and describe my experience so far, in anticipation of JavaONE.

1) To start with, it's disconcerting seeing all the Oracle branding (already?) replacing the previous comfortable Sun/Java branding.

2) My experience 2 years ago was punctuated with speeches from the "fathers" of the language. Will they be there this year?

3) The general sloppyness of the signup / registration / application and experience. As far as I can tell, no where does it say it will be at the Moscone center. Until recently, they had the Hilton hotel as the location.

4) Everyone that went to Google IO got a free Evo and Droid. What is Oracle doing this year to create that kind of excitement or buzz? Or is it possible they are doing nothing except pissing off their biggest supporters so they don't show up?

Is that less "toolish" for ya?

Matt

 

 

Matt -

This will be my last JavaONE. Oracle blows. I have the feeling I am going to be accosted in every hallway by some dude wanting to sell me a Oracle DB support license.

You post is irrational, and borderline toolish.

Oracle salespeople each have their own specific accounts (not to mention difficult sales quotas), and they spend the entire conference in pre-planned meetings and events with those accounts. They would literally have nothing to gain even if they sold you something in a hallway (their commissions come only from their accounts). Your comment was both paranoid and degrading.

Thinking rationally: If the conference sucks, then you shouldn't come back. If the conference is good, and you're still using Java, then why wouldn't it be worth coming back?

Attempt some independent thought .. even if you decide to think for yourself, you can still rely on Google for search.

Peace,

Cameron Purdy | Oracle Coherence

http://coherence.oracle.com/

Hi Matt -

I wrote and rewrote my original response to you at least 5 times before posting it. This is not an easy topic for me. First, I cannot even comment on the lawsuit (company policy), assuming that I even had an opinion. Second, I'm relatively in the dark on everything but the area of software that I work with, so my opinions on many of these undiscussable topics are unformed (and likely uninformed), if even relevant.

Nonetheless, my response was less a defence of my employer than a suggestion that you were tilting a bit too far at windmills. In the course of your windmill tilting, you proceeded to insult a rather large swath of people whom you know little to nothing about. I simply do not see how that is in any way acceptable, unless it's open season on people who work for Oracle and I missed that announcement.

Lastly, if I were defending my employer, I did a rather poor job of it. (Add that to the list of good reasons that already exist to fire me.) Honestly, I cannot begin to defend what I am not allowed to discuss.

p.s. Regarding your issues with the conference, I will respond to that separately. If you're there, look me up. My personal email is first dot last at gmail.

Peace,

Cameron Purdy | Oracle Coherence

http://coherence.oracle.com/

Cameron,

No worries. You have always been a rational adult on this board. I am happy that you are happy at Oracle. I was mainly trying to be funny. 

You should know however, that when "we" talk about "Oracle", we are picturing Larry. It's easy to hate Larry Ellison.

Matt

Hi Matt -

No worries. You have always been a rational adult on this board. I am happy that you are happy at Oracle. I was mainly trying to be funny. 

Oh [email protected]$ .. I'm usually pretty good at detecting humor, but I totally missed it this time. Sorry for the over-reaction. I think I'm a bit too sensitive about the whole situation, and it is an uncomfortable situation with good friends (from Sun, Oracle, Google, etc.) being directly impacted by it.

Peace,

Cameron Purdy | Oracle Coherence

http://coherence.oracle.com/

Cameron,

Well my first message was flippant, my second was trying to give serious feedback. If the stars align and we meet at a bar, I will buy you a beer. I am the dude that looks like George Clooney, only stronger.

Matt

 

 

Hi Matt -

No worries. You have always been a rational adult on this board. I am happy that you are happy at Oracle. I was mainly trying to be funny. 

Oh [email protected]$ .. I'm usually pretty good at detecting humor, but I totally missed it this time. Sorry for the over-reaction. I think I'm a bit too sensitive about the whole situation, and it is an uncomfortable situation with good friends (from Sun, Oracle, Google, etc.) being directly impacted by it.

Peace,

Cameron Purdy | Oracle Coherence

http://coherence.oracle.com/

 

Hi Matt -

1) To start with, it's disconcerting seeing all the Oracle branding (already?) replacing the previous comfortable Sun/Java branding.

That is a natural result of an acquisition. Oracle acquires 10+ companies a year, and while some branding remains (e.g. product names), the company brands tend to disappear over time.

2) My experience 2 years ago was punctuated with speeches from the "fathers" of the language. Will they be there this year?

In the case of James Gosling, the only information I have is from his blog, in which he states:

I won't be officially attending, but I'll probably cruise the disreputable bars in the neighborhood looking for interesting parties.

3) The general sloppyness of the signup / registration / application and experience. As far as I can tell, no where does it say it will be at the Moscone center. Until recently, they had the Hilton hotel as the location.

I don't know anything about the registration, other than all large conferences seem to outsource the conference organizing to companies who have never heard of the interwebs and whose programmers learned UI design from the back of a cereal box.

There was a decision to co-locate JavaOne with the existing Oracle conference (Oracle OpenWorld), which is a gigantic conference (as many as 85,000 people). I do not know the reason behind the decision; perhaps the Moscone did not have another week available with relatively short notice, or perhaps it was purposeful to subsume the conference into OpenWorld. Either way, it is disappointing, if for no other reason than the logistical challenges of adding 5,000-15,000 more people to a conference that already uses up every hotel in the city.

4) Everyone that went to Google IO got a free Evo and Droid. What is Oracle doing this year to create that kind of excitement or buzz? Or is it possible they are doing nothing except pissing off their biggest supporters so they don't show up?

You are judging conferences by the quality of the tshatshkes? Oy. I can't see this ending well.

Google is using their exit from JavaOne as a PR exercise (that you are obviously obliging to swallow). It is indeed unfortunate that they are taking their toys and going home; I will certainly miss them at the conference.

Peace,

Cameron Purdy | Oracle Coherence

http://coherence.oracle.com/

Cameron,

A very laid-back friend came over for drinks a while back and was very excited to show me his two new Android phones he got from the Google IO conference. His excitement spilled over in to "how great the sessions" were, etc..

It's easy to see that JavaONE is not a top priority for Oracle this year, for the reasons stated above. I hope they change their mind in the future, but I cannot blame them if they don't. They are in the business of making money and Sun sometimes set those priorities aside to promote their baby. Look where they are now.

Matt

Cameron,

Sadly, I have to agree with you on the independence of thought point. It is so unfortunate to see seasoned professionals in an engineering field abandon calm rationalization in favor of tribalism so quickly, as the orginal article aptly indicates...

Cheers,

Reza

Seriously Reza, it is clear we disagree here, but saying that someone working for Oracle has calm rationalization and independent point of view, while others who oppose your view are favouring tribalism is insulting, at least to my intelligence.

Chief,

The way I see it, who someone works for is far less revelant than what they are actually saying. The other way round is really just an underhanded variant of ad-hominem.

And I do sadly see a lot of hysteria and not that much actual reasoning on the lawsuit issue ranging from outright nonsense like "Java is dead" or more politically motivated but equally ridicoulous "Oracle is attacking open source". Now, there are more reasonable views that do not agree with mine such as Oracle should not enforce these patents and let Google create a new language that shares a lot of Java syntax but has a different name such as G#.

Cheers,

Reza

"The way I see it, who someone works for is far less revelant than what they are actually saying."

Reza, I really don't want to turn this discussion into me vs you, but you were first to take liberty to flag anyone opposing your view as pro-tribalism and irrational, were those irrational people like me actually post links to source code for anyone to view and judge whether or not copyright violation has been made.

Chief,

I didn't say you in particular were being wholesale irrational - I think you are perhaps honestly misinterpreting that. Likewise, I don't recall saying anyone that disagrees with me must be irrational. There are definitely some elements of this ongoing debate (not necesarily just this thread) that are irrational - some of which I specifically mentioned and there are myriad others such as assuming anything anyone from Oracle says must be automatically invalid or "Oracle is evil, anything not agreeing with open source dogma is evil, Google is good", etc.

Indeed you in particular are making some points that would seem to have valid counter-points (which of course you are under no obligation to mention yourself, that's what others are here for :-)).

Kindest regards,

Reza

"that would seem to have valid counter-points"

Feel free to share them. Explanation of one point I am trying to make is made available as link to source code where anyone can judge for themselves.

Chief,

Thanks, I already did. Note the point below about the copyright issues being around the meaning of what it means to be a JVM, not mechanical code copyrights (which is a different matter altogether not mentioned in the lawsuit at all).

Cheers,

Reza

"meaning of what it means to be a JVM, not mechanical code copyrights"

Android has its own bytecode format and own VM that is capable to execute that bytecode. Hence Android VM has nothing to do with concept of Java VM. This means there is nothing Java-ish in shipped phones and applications running inside the phone. This can be empirically validated by looking at Android bytecode specification and implementation details. And pointing out again that Android has never claimed to be Java VM, so mentioning copyright in VM context really makes no sense.

If you have said copyright of API, that would make some sense, and we could proceed to argue regarding that point, such as if Oracle is violating copyright of some previous API which had Map interface and put/get/delete operations.

Chief,

The point from my perspective is that these are simply clever workarounds to run Java syntax verbatim with more than a coincidental API overlap with Java SE, not to mention the branding issues with mentioning the "Java Programming Language" and the langauge that runs on the Dalvik VM not having it's own name otherwise. I also suspect that almost every Andriod developer thinks that they are developing on a non-compatible version of Java, which is too serious of a red flag to ignore for any rational organization with the ownership of Java.

Now, if you are arguing that these are clever enough workarounds, frankly that's is for the legal system to decide and is pretty subjective even after a court decision either way. I strongly suspect that the "duck test" will hold a lot of ground with a jury in this case...

And all that is separate and apart from the Sun patents that can be applied to any VM, Java or otherwise which I believe to be the last line of defense against potential JVM fragmentation.

Now, let's kindly move on from this and agree to disagree as gentlemen. Frankly, I think I've said all that I had to say and see no real reason to say more...

Cheers,

Reza

"Sun patents that can be applied [as] the last line of defense against potential JVM fragmentation."

There is no JVM fragmentation here because Android VM has its own bytecode specification and execution runtime and is completely different system. They do not claim/brand themselves as JVM. You can not run Java bytecode directly on Android JVM. Period. 

This is saddening. We are loosing the best open source language because of Oracle's recent lawsuit against Google.

This is saddening. We are losing the best open source language because of Oracle's recent lawsuit against Google.

I thought the Open JDK is open sourced - so I do not really understand the problem, when you in general talk about Java. For the mobile variant it might be different.

I thought the Open JDK is open sourced

Correct. It's GPL licensed. As per wikipedia:

OpenJDK (aka Open Java Development Kit) is a Free and open source implementation of the Java programming language. It is the result of an effort Sun Microsystems began in 2006. The implementation is licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL) with a linking exception, which exempts components of the Java class library from the GPL licensing terms.

Peace,

Cameron Purdy | Oracle Coherence

http://coherence.oracle.com/

I could be completely wrong but as I understand it. Google didn't want to live by the Sun license for using Java and used a loophole in the license and created their own derivative Java version for Android. IF that is true, I can understand that Oracle would try to sue them. 

I could be completely wrong but as I understand it. Google didn't want to live by the Sun license for using Java and used a loophole in the license and created their own derivative Java version for Android. IF that is true, I can understand that Oracle would try to sue them. 

Yes and no.  Google didn't want to pay through the nose for Java ME, which is long in the tooth (e.g. does not support Java 5 language features!) and does not really adequately address high-end phones and tablets.  They therefore produced their own independent VM implementation which they explicitly said was *not* Java -- allowing them to save loads of money and to innovate on their own terms rather than Sun's (Java ME has been highly non-innovative for years).  Sun should have either (a) charged less or (b) come to terms on rapidly innovating Java ME with Google.  Failure to do either really tells me Sun has themselves to blame for Google going their own way with Android.

Oracle has responded by claiming that Google's VM violates several software patents they hold on VM technologies.  This is essentially a "we thought of most all VM stuff before you and don't like what you're doing, so pay us" response.  Software patents are reprehensible stiflers of innovation and competition at this point -- and Oracle's willingness to use them against a pillar of the Java community is chilling.

Oracle has also claimed that JVM code was copied.  If *that* is the case, I completely support Oracle jumping on Google -- though in that case the case should have been limited to this claim and likely quietly settled out of court.

Cameron,

Good to see someone from Oracle speaking out against some of the irrational stuff going around for the past few weeks...

Kindest regards,

Reza

I agree and couldn't have said it better myself. Also, I am 100% sure NO JVM code has been copied at all since Google ain't that stupid. If you check the JVM source code of both projects, it is clear that those are two completely different code bases.

What Oracle is saying is that besides those low-level implementation patents for VM, Google has violated copyright laws of Core Java libraries by having interfaces and classes with same name and same methods (Set, Map, HashMap etc), which is basically attack on Apache Harmony project. I am 100% sure no source code has been copied into Harmony from Sun, it just so happens that API looks the same, which proves again how bad this move actually is.

Where are now all those anti-Sun people who were complaining all the time how JCP is bad, how this and how that. Sun at least didn't do stuff like this and had at least some credibility in community.

I meant to say that I agree with Jess Holle.

Chief,

With all due respect, the "attack on Apache Harmony" statement is incorrect because Apache Harmony has an explicit goal to be a certified, licensed, open source JDK implementation that passes the TCK (the Java license covers any relevant patents that apply to the JVM). That is not the case with Adroid, hence the problem. As the original article link indicates, the lawsuit has nothing to do with open source really. If Google had done this with closed-source code, the underlying issues would remain the same.

In my opinion, Sun would have been justified in doing exactly what Oracle is doing now and it is unfortunate that they were not a little more vigilant about this...

Cheers,

Reza

"Apache Harmony has an explicit goal to be a certified"

Android does not have that goal and Google never claimed Android is, so I fail to see reason for this lawsuit since Android is not related to Java in any way. No phone is shipped with any piece of software that has anything to do with Java. It is clear that only reason for this lawsuit is because Oracle is losing innovation on mobile space, and they are now trying to muscle Google.

If Harmony was profitable business you can bet Oracle would try to muscle them as well on this copyright claim since they refuse to accept TCK conditions Oracle requires.

Chief,

Your statement on the JCP confuses me. If you do indeed see the value in the JCP, it might be worthwhile to note that Google made no serious attempt at improving Java ME or any other standards based Java technology for that matter before going the Android route that had obvious pitfalls that they tried to dance around. They also have made no serious attempt to give back to the standard Java APIs any of the advancements made in Android (which is basically their own little walled garden). If they did/were doing either of the above, I doubt we would be having this conversation now...

Cheers,

Reza

"Your statement on the JCP confuses me."

JCP comment has nothing to do with Android, but rather points out that people thought Sun;s JCP was bad in general, now compare this and it is clear how things are.

Android has nothing to do with Java, and does not want to do anything with Java as long as Oracle requires license fees.

Chief,

I beg to differ with you that Adroid has nothing to do with Java. Ignoring the common sense adage "if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck" for a moment, it might be worthwhile to review this article that I think has some very good points on the issue: http://weblogs.java.net/blog/opinali/archive/2010/08/17/android-java.

Cheers,

Reza

"I beg to differ with you that Adroid has nothing to do with Java."

I already read that post, and as one reader replied: "Arbitrary defined equivalences do not hold in court."

Code bases are different and you can check for yourself that is it so by taking a look at HashMap class from Harmony and HashMap shipped with Sun JDK and HashMap in Android. Same can be applied to JVM implementation, completely different code bases. Google does not claim to be Java platform.

Regarding the patent lawsuit, since patents in this case deal with low-level implementation detail, it is clear that this is pure attempt to muscle Google for cash, and these patents cover any VM implementation out there, not just Java specific ones.

Chief,

I agree the patents are relevant to all VMs and I'm not sure that is such a bad thing. I think "arbitrarily defined equivalence" is pretty subjective and might indeed be all that really matters in court :-).

Cheers,

Reza

"I think "arbitrarily defined equivalence" is pretty subjective and might indeed be all that really matters in court"

I linked the source code of Harmony and you can go and check for yourself, completely different codebases, everything is written from scratch. Guy from that post is talking some abstract stuff, this is concrete evidence.

"I agree the patents are relevant to all VMs and I'm not sure that is such a bad thing."

Then at least say Oracle is enforcing its alleded IP, and don't give us a tale how Oracle is doing this in order to prevent fragmentation of Java, since these low level IMPLMENTATION details have nothing to do with fragmentation of Java, its compatibility and so on.

Chief,

I think we are rapidly approaching a point here where we should agree to disagree and move on to bigger and better things...

Differing implemenation of the same interface means little. For example, all lisenced Java EE application servers have different implementations of the same API. The issue as I see it is how close the actual API is. And I think Adroid is way too close for comfort. It also happens to be the case that I don't see Osvaldo's analysis as all that abstract at all but rather engineering driven (albeit it is probably not a "layman"'s analysis), as is James Gosling's statements on Andriod fragmentation.

Personally, what would make me comfortable is Google using a completely separate name for the language it uses on Adroid, such as G# instead of its currently ambigous state where they refer to the "Java Programming Langauge" in the Android documentation. Now, even in that case I think they will have to likely license patents from the likes of Oracle, IBM and Microsoft. That is the reality of any engineering endeavour and I can't say I see that as a bad thing. I for one did consider patenting some of my own engineering innovations and certainly would enforce them where applicable to get righful payoff for my hard work or moment of clarity.

If you had an impression that I think Oracle's primary reason for the lawsuit is heading off JVM fragmentation, that is not the case. The truth is that I don't presume to understand what Oracle's motivations are and am still waiting for Oracle to clarify that themselves. That is perhaps what they will do at JavaOne. What I can say for sure is that I think there is a definite risk of future JVM fragmentation with Android and I am fairly certain that would have been Sun's stance in a lawsuit.

Cheers,

Reza

Reza, you first say:

"I think incompatible versions of Java is the last thing Java developers need. Nothing would hinder Java ecosystem evolution/innovation worse than having to write application servers, frameworks, plugins, IDEs, tools, dynamic languagues, etc that cannot rely on it's underlying platform."

then I point out that patent part does not hold since it is low level implementation detail irrelevant to any kind of compatibility, even if Google wanted to be compatible at all, and then you contradict yourself in last reply.

Also mentioning Java programming language in documentation and marketing/branding product as Java compliant are two completely different things. Since Google is not marketing/branding/claiming to be TCK certified entire case is flawed.

Chief,

You are of course entitled to your opinions. Sadly, I don't see how the point of Adroid being close to a bastardized JVM and API, branding rather than actual implemenation being more relevant is contradictory. Rather, I would think that the arguments are corollary.

APIs are way too close -> can run the same code between a licenced JVM and and unlincsed one -> large potential for fragmentation. Where is the break in the logical chain that pertains to how the VM itself is implemented?

Note, the Sun patents Oracle is using has nothing to do with how something is implemented but what is implemented. The copyright is around Java branding, usage and what it meas to be a JVM, not mechanical code copyrights. Maybe that's the confusion?

Cheers,

Reza

Personally, what would make me comfortable is Google using a completely separate name for the language it uses on Adroid, such as G# instead of its currently ambigous state where they refer to the "Java Programming Langauge" in the Android documentation. Now, even in that case I think they will have to likely license patents from the likes of Oracle, IBM and Microsoft. That is the reality of any engineering endeavour and I can't say I see that as a bad thing. I for one did consider patenting some of my own engineering innovations and certainly would enforce them where applicable to get righful payoff for my hard work or moment of clarity.

Reza, this is what's likely to happen and why Oracle's lawsuit is so bad for Java. What it does is take a huge growth vector for Java and tosses it - your solution of "oh, abandon Java and call it G#" is the failure point here.

It doesn't fragment Java; it abandons it. IMO, total and complete fail.

Here is source code of String class for Harmony project, and compare it to one found in Sun JDK, completely different code bases.

http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/harmony/enhanced/java/trunk/classlib/modules/luni/src/main/java/java/lang/String.java?view=markup

I read something recently that suggests that the reason that Oracle is suing Android is that they have no rights under the open source license because they have not implemented the JDK in full.

In short, Android doesn't support Swing and AWT so it can't be Java and therefore is not protected under Open JDK.  I'm not completely sure I have this right.  I'm unable to locate the article/blog that I got this idea from.

In any event, assuming this is correct, I have mixed feelings.  I think that preventing the definition of "what is Java" from being commandeered is important (see MS JVM) but Swing and AWT are pretty awful.  I sure wouldn't want to have to implement them.  I definitely empathize with Google for trying to get around doing that.

James,

You are indeed correct. It would be a much more clear-cut case if Android copied the Java SE/ME/EE API "verbatim". In a sense the patents are the last line of defense against the potential of Java fragmentation, I think. Again, I do hope Oracle makes some of this a little clearer themselves at some point...

I can't say that I sympathise all that much with Google because they are after all a big company making money from Android and could have easily pay for a Java license just like RIM/BlackBerry and pretty much everyone else in the mobile space does except for Apple. Indeed, dare I say it - Andriod looks a lot like a knock-off of the iPhone to me...

Cheers,

Reza

Folks,

Here is an excellent post discussing these exact issues: http://weblogs.java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici/archive/2010/08/30/some-more-food-brain-about-oracle-vs-google-war

I agree with the author that Oracle could indeed do a lot better in getting its own side of the story out. Now, it's understandable that it's difficult to change a corporation's culture/policies overnight but I can't think of a more compelling reason for change than the stewardship of the Java community...

Cheers,

Reza

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20100829012006847

Software patents suck. Imagine what present would look like if fathers of our industry patented stuff like double linked list, hashmap etc. Or try to imagine what the future might look like if there are no software patents, and how limited the future will be if this patent madness continues.

Relevant quote from article:

"This is yet another example of the cynical use of the American legal system to extort money out of successful companies — in the name of protecting innovation and innovators."

More from Groklaw:

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20100813112425821

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2010082609464792

Quote:

"As for predictions, I’ll make only one: whoever wins will also lose. Because this suit is going to negatively impact – probably substantially – Java adoption. The enterprise technology landscape is more fragmented by the day, as it transitions from .NET or Java othodoxy to multi-language heterogeneity. Oracle’s suit will accelerate this process as it introduces for the first time legal uncertainty around the Java platform. Apple and Microsoft will be thrilled by this development, and scores of competitive languages and platforms are likely to see improved traction as a result of Java defections."

Quote:

"Dalvik does not license Java, does not use Java trademarks, does not claim to be Java compatible,
and does not have to comply with Java compliance testing, or the terms of Java licensing. This is very different from Microsoft and J++ in which Microsoft broke Java licensing terms by licensing Java, and then trying to embrace and extend Java into a non-compatible form (which broke the terms of licensing)."

I'm no fan of software patents but it's hard to reconcile:

* Davlik has nothing to do with Java.

* Oracles lawsuit creates uncertainity around Java.

In a nutshell how does a lawsuit about something that has nothing to do with Java create uncertainity around the Java platform?

Honestly most of the conversation around this whole subject seems emotional.  I wish people would put as much effort into lobbying against software patents as they do into bashing Oracle.  Oracle's lawsuit is merely a symptom of the problem.

"In a nutshell how does a lawsuit about something that has nothing to do with Java create uncertainity around the Java platform?"

General Java community does not have time/will to go into low level details in order to get the clear picture of the entire lawsuit like some readers of this site do, so what they perceive from high level news articles is uncertainity of Java under Oracle's leadership. Some colleagues of mine who are not interested in legal aspects etc, do perceive Oracle as "bad" and Google as "good" just from reading news websites, especially when taken into consideration recent death of OpenSolaris. Their impression may not necessarily be correct, but that is the general feeling in the air.

I originally wrote this to Josh on learning that he won't be at JavaOne. Seems to fit when I address it to Google:

Dear Google:

I will miss your presence at JavaOne/Oracle World. I've heard you speak many times. You are a great voice for Java and OSS. 

As for me, I will be at the conference to represent Open Source Testing (OST.) My company even has a booth again this year. While I am an OSS person at heart, I believe it is better to participate than to be quiet, even if the host is threatening or malevolent.

I am really curious to see how this JavaOne comes together. Like you I attended all of the JavaOne's except the first one. I plan to write about the experience on TheServerSide and DZone as I have in past years.

I also hope that something changes in the next 4 weeks and you participate in JavaOne afterall.

-Frank Cohen

http://www.PushToTest.com