Back to the latest episode, since this is a technical podcast (still
is?) I was preparing myself for a 2 hour episode thinking they'd
actually go over the patents in question and was disappointed (it even
seemed like they didn't even read them. Dick, it IS about the JVM) as
perhaps they would've
Given that Android lives under the permissive Apache License; and you
can go browse the source code, fork it, file bugs, submit patches...
what makes their statement false?
That fact that not everything is yet open source (i.e. ADB) or that
they maintain their own internal source tree along with
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 9/7/10 15:12 , BoD wrote:
Well, do you think that if you do something against me, you're
all the whole Italy? :-)
No but my logic is if Oracle says something very broad like
(voluntarily exaggerating for the sake of the argument) only
Oracle
I don't think anyone would disagree that going after Harmony really is an
attack on Open Source.
Unless Oracle are seeking to take down the Patent system (highly unlikely)
by demonstrating that it's too fragile to be allowed to continue,
then I very much doubt that they will act against Apache.
I don't think you got the point. It's helpful to google. Hence google
is doing it. End of story. As has been said by others, it is actively
ILLEGAL for a publicly traded corporation to engage in charity, if its
easy to prove there was an alternate route that would have earned a
lot more money.
Also, while it *seems* obvious that oracle is attacking google using a
similar ulterior motive as when sun sued microsoft, the mechanism by
which they sued, which is those 8 patents listed in the suit, and here
it comes:
*IS* an attack on open source!!!
Because those patents are so ridiculously
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Reinier Zwitserloot reini...@gmail.comwrote:
As has been said by others, it is actively
ILLEGAL for a publicly traded corporation to engage in charity, if its
easy to prove there was an alternate route that would have earned a
lot more money.
Er... come
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Reinier Zwitserloot reini...@gmail.comwrote:
We can and should lament the fall of Sun, as they more than any other
company tried to sell the notion that creating community goodwill is
good for the corporation, but, well, they went bankrupt
Wouldn't that be
No it's not, you mistake criminal law for that which can get you sued.
Criminal offences are illegal, murder is illegal, breaking a contract is not
illegal
This is a good place to start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort
Giving to charity isn't illegal, it's good PR!
No, Sun going bankrupt doesn't prove anything. Who knows why they went
bankrupt? There's some correlation, and people tend to assume
correlation means causation, and also that anecdotal evidence can be
taken seriously. Even if sun went bankrupt directly because of their
friendly attitude, that
Now you're just being pedantic. We all know what I meant.
On Sep 8, 9:56 pm, Kevin Wright kev.lee.wri...@gmail.com wrote:
No it's not, you mistake criminal law for that which can get you sued.
Criminal offences are illegal, murder is illegal, breaking a contract is not
illegal
This is a good
The point is, the law states that the executive team is obligated to
maximize shareholder value. Prioritizing something else over that job
is not lawful. Please stop the pedantry, these threads really don't
need to become even longer.
On Sep 9, 12:16 am, Cédric Beust ♔ ced...@beust.com wrote:
Dont confuse my argument, i just find Google's stance hypocritical. When
they said its an attack on open source, they really meant its an attack on
their ability to get a free ride...
You can not copyright or patent a syntax, and the syntax is ALL Google
is borrowing. Sun had nothing that
Firstly my argument was not about technicalities. Googles statement that it
was an attack on open source was hypocritical because they want to gain from
open source and took advantage of free java but when it was their turn to
cough up the cash they did everything but. Im not sure if its business
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 9/7/10 10:10 , Miroslav Pokorny wrote:
Too me its like taking an open source library, making lots of cash
and never even giving the authors a donation. Yes its legal but
its overall, its disappointing.
I don't disagree on the whole, but the
On Sep 7, 10:10 am, Miroslav Pokorny miroslav.poko...@gmail.com
wrote:
Firstly my argument was not about technicalities.
We are engineers, technicalities is what we do... otherwise we'd be
priests.
Googles statement that it
was an attack on open source was hypocritical because they want to
@Casper
This will be my last comment on this. You have conveniently ignored the
overall context of my statements.
re/ GWT
GWT is even more interesting given its changes. Its very much an different
take on the java platform, its great and all makes sense but for legal types
they might cry about
This will be my last comment on this. You have conveniently ignored the
overall context of my statements.
Fair enough, I fail to see what I ignored but we can end it here. GWT
is not a different take on a Java platform, it's an emulation layer
which, once again, allows people familiar with the
Oh, no question. Google is milking the Whoa, what the heck is oracle
doing here angle as much as they can, and they are definitely
grandstanding to do it. But why shouldn't they? If ever the argument
corporations do whatever they need to do to earn money holds, it
holds here. Google understands
Well, do you think that if you do something against me, you're all the
whole Italy? :-)
No but my logic is if Oracle says something very broad like
(voluntarily exaggerating for the sake of the argument) only Oracle
has the right to make a VM because we have the patent.
Then Android has a VM.
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 1:10 AM, Miroslav Pokorny miroslav.poko...@gmail.com
wrote:
Im not sure if its business or an American thing but it seems you forget
to about being human which is sometimes mostly about doing the right thing
regardless of what the law says. Overall most companies
2010/9/7 Cédric Beust ♔ ced...@beust.com
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 1:10 AM, Miroslav Pokorny
miroslav.poko...@gmail.com wrote:
Im not sure if its business or an American thing but it seems you forget
to about being human which is sometimes mostly about doing the right thing
regardless of
Ahh, the joys of due diligence!
IANAL, but...
Company executives are legally compelled to maximise shareholder income,
just so long as they don't break any criminal laws in doing so.
Fail to outsource your clothing factory to China? Yes, you can get sued for
that...
Nowadays, the only real
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 9/7/10 11:22 , Casper Bang wrote:
What cash? You can not expect Google to have bought Sun just because
they happen to use some of their open source technology.
Honestly, for the few (basically zero) things that I can understand of
business,
What happens if Oracle doesn't win the lawsuit? Maybe Google wins and sues
Oracle for irreparable damages (lost time, market share, client confidence
etc).
Nobody really knows what will happen - it's all speculation
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Fabrizio Giudici
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Fabrizio Giudici
fabrizio.giud...@tidalwave.it wrote:
Sun was bought for $6/7M, right?
Billions, not millions,
--
Cédric
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups The
Java Posse group.
To post to this group, send email
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 9/7/10 21:16 , Cédric Beust ♔ wrote:
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Fabrizio Giudici
fabrizio.giud...@tidalwave.it
mailto:fabrizio.giud...@tidalwave.it wrote:
Sun was bought for $6/7M, right?
Billions, not millions,
Of course,
They shouldn't claim that Oracle are suing open source - for one. It
isn't helpful to the wider community to add FUD to the FUD (but it
might be helpful to google to be dishonest like this).
On Sep 7, 9:46 pm, Reinier Zwitserloot reini...@gmail.com wrote:
Oh, no question. Google is milking the
Might just be two euro-cents, but, spot on.
I believe the Apache Harmony TCK thing is in regards to the technical
side of it: Apache Harmony does pass the actual TCK, at least it is
rumoured to do so, as in all the test cases pass. It is not, however,
officially a recipient of the official TCK
Not disputing the attack on open source angle - but Oracle are
filing a lawsuit against open source, as said by Josh Bloch:
http://googlecode.blogspot.com/2010/08/update-on-javaone.html
Google are adding to the fud by talking like this, and a lot of this
is grandstanding to get the development
Should have said Oracle are NOT filing a lawsuit against open
source as claimed by...
On Sep 7, 10:14 am, Michael Neale michael.ne...@gmail.com wrote:
Not disputing the attack on open source angle - but Oracle are
filing a lawsuit against open source, as said by Josh
In the end i am more disappointed in Google than Oracle. I know I got a good
deal and lot of gifts from Sun and I did not help contribute my bit to keep
their guardianship of Java going by sponsoring or contributing back to their
business. I suppose I am one of the many millions of parasites who
On Sep 7, 2:31 am, Miroslav Pokorny miroslav.poko...@gmail.com
wrote:
In the end i am more disappointed in Google than Oracle. I know I got a good
deal and lot of gifts from Sun and I did not help contribute my bit to keep
their guardianship of Java going by sponsoring or contributing back to
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Casper Bang casper.b...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sep 7, 2:31 am, Miroslav Pokorny miroslav.poko...@gmail.com
wrote:
In the end i am more disappointed in Google than Oracle. I know I got a
good
deal and lot of gifts from Sun and I did not help contribute my bit to
34 matches
Mail list logo
