|
Authored by: jbb on Saturday, April 21 2012 @ 07:35 AM EDT |
I think we've already established that there is nothing really to
license for an
independent implementation (perhaps maybe a couple of patent
claims?), so
there is no infringement unless the implementation was calling
itself
"Java"
before it was certified compatible.
I agree with
what you say but it is only true if APIs cannot be protected by copyright. If
you want to create an independent implementation then you have to re-implement
the APIs. That's what a independent implementation does. According to Oracle's
theory, these re-implementations would violate their API copyrights right up
until the time they passed the TCK. I'm saying the whole JSPA process was
predicated on the fact that APIs are not protected by copyright. Oracle's API
theory conflicts with their own Java business practices.
--- Our job
is to remind ourselves that there are more contexts than the one we’re in now —
the one that we think is reality.
-- Alan Kay [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|