|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 08 2012 @ 10:25 PM EDT |
The two comments above raised a question that I can't answer...
If Oracle doesn't own the copyright for the implementation (assuming this is
covered by one of the gpl'd implementations like Harmony), wouldn't they have
had to knowingly taken this infringing implementation from Apache?
It would be like if I bought a gun from a convicted felon, then called the
police on the seller for illegal possession. I may be in the clear once I have
the gun, but the transaction itself would be tainted because the seller couldn't
have legally had it to begin with. (Bad example for a slew of reasons, but
illustrates the point reasonably well).
They may be in the clear GPL-wise, but how can they then justify not suing
Apache immediately? Couldn't Google raise the defense that given those events
they believed it not to infringe?
-Cory Fields[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 08 2012 @ 11:30 PM EDT |
"Resolving symbolic references into pointers (i.e. addresses) - that
must've been obvious to anyone in IT since the dawn of the internet."
To my recollection, this PREDATES the Internet.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: ThrPilgrim on Wednesday, May 09 2012 @ 09:10 AM EDT |
I keep thinking of Symbolic Assemblers from the early 1970's
---
Beware of him who would deny you access to information for in his heart he
considers himself your master.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: red floyd on Wednesday, May 09 2012 @ 11:22 AM EDT |
My copy of Deitel's OS book discussed late binding back in '84.
---
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a *CITIZEN* of the United
States of America.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
