Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

Proving parallel lines never meet | 388 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

Proving parallel lines never meet

Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 06 2012 @ 02:07 PM EDT

What I hope the judge understands, is that the "easy route" of reusing
Sun's APIs (via the Apache Harmony code) was the ONLY route that would achieve
compatibility, which was massively important (the platform might have been
dead-on-arrival if it didn't have millions of already-primed Java programmers as
potential coders for Android).

Google's other two choices that would preserve compatibility, would be (1) to
write their own code from scratch just as Apache Harmony did but still matching
the APIs 100%, or (2) to pay a bunch of money to Sun to license Sun's
implementation of the APIs and also Sun's Java trademarks.

Oracle would like everyone to believe that (2) was the only legal option, but
that's not what Sun believed at the time. Sun believed that Apache Harmony was
completely legal, and even if they didn't exactly like it, they were better off
welcoming it than trying to kill it off.

And the same was true of Android.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )