Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 21 2012 @ 10:40 AM EDT |
And is the core of Android. So isn't Android (the work as a whole) already
subject to the GPL?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 21 2012 @ 10:43 AM EDT |
OpenJDK is one specific implementation of the API. If that implementation is
released under the GPL, it does not necessarily mean that the API (as specified
by the specification) is under that license (as the API isn't code, it's not
even clear what it would mean to put it under the GPL).[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: darrellb on Saturday, April 21 2012 @ 11:00 AM EDT |
That the open Apis exist is beneficial to Google [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 21 2012 @ 11:11 AM EDT |
Java API is under GPL v2 not v3, or?
Maybe it makes a difference in this case.
IMANAL[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: timkb4cq on Saturday, April 21 2012 @ 11:26 AM EDT |
But Harmony is under the Apache 2.0 license. The same java API specifications
are part of Harmony.
Google used some Harmony code and Android is licensed under the Apache license,
the terms of which Google follows, so no problem there.
Google does release it's modifications to the Linux kernel per the GPL 2.0
license.
While I don't agree with everything Google does, they do try to be good
corporate citizens and follow both the spirit & letter of the Free Software
& Open Source licenses they use.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Ian Al on Saturday, April 21 2012 @ 01:59 PM EDT |
The Java API Specification is the documentation of how programmers get access to
specific functions in the class libraries. You get the Java API Specification
from Oracle.
The OpenJDK is the release of both the java source code for the libraries and
the java byte code for the libraries.
The compiler looks for strings in the program source code that match strings in
the libraries and uses the match to make available to the program, the library
function implementation code identified by the string.
The Specification lists the strings in each library package that identify
specific functions in the library and how parameters are sent and responses
returned, if any, from the library function.
The compiler never has to read the contents of the Java API Specification to do
its work. That document is just a guide to programmers. Skilled library writers
can also use it to implement their own versions of libraries that do what the
proprietary libraries do.
The program and the library code get integrated by the compiler into the
compiled byte-code class file. That process saves the programmer having to
invent the code that comes from the library.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: symbolset on Saturday, April 21 2012 @ 03:34 PM EDT |
You don't license APIs. There is no copyright on APIs. The whole idea of
separating this info out away from the implementing code is to make it public
and non-copyrightable. You might as well distribute advertising under
non-disclosure as copyright your API.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 23 2012 @ 10:33 AM EDT |
If a license to use the Java trademark includes a restriction on how OpenJDK is
used (i.e. only desktop and servers), doesn't that conflict incompatibly with
the GPL license which forbids adding such restrictions?
I thought GPL had terms that say you must pass all the rights that you have to
the copyrighted work, perpetually downstream, when you distribute. If there are
conflicting terms and conditions, the only way to comply with all licenses is
not to distribute.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|