decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
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

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
0563 as text | 96 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
0016 as text
Authored by: naka on Saturday, May 19 2012 @ 03:58 PM EDT
<b>From:</b> Vineet Gupta - OEM Software Sales CTO/Worldwide SE
Director &lt;vineet.gupta@sun.com&gt;<br>
<b>Sent:</b> The Feb 09 2006 15:33:48 PST<br>
<b>To:</b> Jonathan Schwartz
&lt;jonathan.schwartz@sun.com&gt;<br>
<b>CC:</b><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: Fwd: Potential Sun Google partnership in the
Mobile Java and OS Space<br>
<b>Attachments:</b><p>

<b>Importance:</b> Normal<br>
<b>Priority:</b> Normal<br>
<b>Sensitivity:</b> None<p>

Jonathan,<br>
Did not send my response as requested because Andy forwarded me
Scott's<br>
response - so I did not respond to the team with mine. I think we<br>
should also push Google to be a Platinum sponsor for JavaOne...<p>

I am hoping you continue to provide Exec sponsoship thru Sergey/Larry<br>
regarding this. We will probably need that when we push on the
financials...<p>

Appreciate you support as always.<p>

-Vineet<p>

<blockquote>&gt;Eric,<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;My team has been keeping me in the loop on this. This is a
great<br>
&gt;opportunity for both companies to jointly provide an Open Source
Java<br>
&gt;Linux Mobile Handset Platform implementation and to build on
the<br>
&gt;momentum of over 1 Billion Java Micro Edition based handsets
deployed<br>
&gt;in the market currently.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;Alan and team on my side have this as a top priority. Jonathan
has<br>
&gt;been reaching out to Sergey on this as well. The financials of
this<br>
&gt;deal will be crucial for Sun to ensure success. I look forward to
use<br>
&gt;announcing our alliance on this soon and getting the
industry,<br>
&gt;developers, OEMs, content and service providers behind us. We
should<br>
&gt;also have the teams start thinking about to play this big at<br>
&gt;JavaOne this year.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;Looking forward to seeing you soon.<br>
&gt;Scott.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;</blockquote><p>

Andy Rudin wrote:<p>

<blockquote>&gt;</blockquote><p>

CONFIDENTIAL<br>
Trial Exhibit 16, Page 1 of 3<br>
OAGOOGLE0000357505<br>
<hr><br>
<blockquote>&gt;<br>
&gt;Begin forwarded message:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;*From: *Scott McNealy &lt;Scott.McNealy@sun.com&gt;<br>
&gt;*Date: *February 8, 2006 5:08:32 AM PST<br>
&gt;*To: *Eric Schmidt &lt;eschmidt@google.com&gt;<br>
&gt;*Cc: *scott.g.mcnealy@Sun.com, &quot;'Andy Rubin'&quot;
&lt;arubin@google.com&gt;,<br>
&gt;Jonathan Schwartz &lt;Jonathan.Schwartz@Sun.com&gt;, Greg
Papadopoulos<br>
&lt;greg@Sun.com&gt;<br>
&gt;*Subject: Re: Potential Sun Google partnership in the Mobile
Java<br>
&gt;and OS Space<br>
&gt;Replay-To: *Scott.McNealy@Sun.com<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;Thanks for the note. Jonathan and the team are on top of this
-<br>
&gt;I'm worried about how we're going to replace the revenue this
is<br>
&gt;likely going to submaring. I'm very supportive of driving a<br>
&gt;completely open phone stack, and even taking risk with Java to
get<br>
&gt;there, but I just need to understand the economics.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;But we're obviously supportive in helping to fuel the market.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;Scott.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;PS Has you team had a chance to try out the new T2000 with<br>
&gt;32 hw threads yet?<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;Eric Schmidt wrote:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;Scott.. I'm in a product review and we are looking at a very<br>
&gt;interesting<br>
&gt;partnership proposal with Sun. Basically, Andy Rubin runs our<br>
&gt;mobile<br>
&gt;op/search engineering group; he is talking with Alan Brenner<br>
&gt;VP Consumer &amp;<br>
&gt;Mobile Systems Group of Sun.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;Google has engaged with Sun's Java team in an effort to form<br>
&gt;an alliance<br>
&gt;around our Open Handset Platform. It is an opportunity for
our<br>
&gt;two<br>
&gt;companies to work together to define the de-factor standard<br>
&gt;software stack<br>
&gt;for mobile phones. Google has adopted a completely open
source<br>
&gt;model as a<br>
&gt;way to solve osme intricate distribution dependencies. It<br>
&gt;makes sense to me<br>
&gt;that Sun and Google should do this together; can you check
and<br>
&gt;hopefully<br></blockquote><p>

CONFIDENTIAL<br>
Trial Exhibit 16, Page 2 of 3<br>
OAGOOGLE0000357506<br>
<hr><br>
<blockquote>&gt;dedicate the resources necessary to move this ahead at
an<br>
&gt;accelerated pace.<br>
&gt;I wanted to make sure you know I will do the same on my side.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;Anyway this is very exciting and hopefully a good idea for<br>
&gt;both of us !<br>
&gt;Thanks and take care.. Eric<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;</blockquote><p>

--<br>
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$<br>
Vineet Gupta<br>
WorldWide Sr. Director<br>
Chief Strategy/Technology officer<br>
OEM Software Systems Engineering<br>
SUN Microsystems<br>
Vineet.Gupta@Sun.Com<br>
(408)404-8950<br>
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$<p>

CONFIDENTIAL<br>
Trial Exhibit 16, Page 3 of 3<br>
OAGOOGLE0000357507

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

0563 as text
Authored by: naka on Saturday, May 19 2012 @ 04:18 PM EDT
<b>From:</b> Jonathan Schwartz
&lt;jis@sun.com&gt;<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thu Mar 08 2007 21:50:33 PST<br>
<b>To:</b> Scott McNealy
&lt;scott.mcnealy@sun.com&gt;<br>
<b>CC:</b><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: plane<br>
<b>Attachments:</b><p>

<b>Importance:</b> Normal<br>
<b>Priority:</b> Normal<br>
<b>Sensitivity</b> None<p>

I'm talking to Bill tomorrow about your admin support.<p>

<p>

On Mar 8, 2007, at 8:52 PM, Scott McNealy wrote:<p>

<blockquote>&gt;I made it. It is fine. Just have no one else to
complain to.<br>
&gt;Try to do it just to you.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;I do have to get a new secy. I hate to say it but I really
miss<br>
&gt;Karen's efficiency and smarts.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;I did good this trip. Calls are going well and we are getting
some<br>
&gt;good momentum in Fed.<br>
&gt;The regular visits are starting to create a buzz. Going back
out<br>
&gt;to DC in first week of May.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;Lets discuss the R&amp;D cuts. We have so much opp.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;The google thing is really a pain. They are immune to
copyright<br>
&gt;laws, good citizenship, they dont share.<br>
&gt;They dont even call back.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;See you tomorrow at Verizon<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;Scott<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;Jonathan Schwartz wrote:<br>
&gt;<br>
<blockquote>&gt;&gt;Sorry to hear about the time wasted - let's
definitely talk about<br>
&gt;&gt;transport options. Your value/hour makes pretty much
anything<br>
&gt;&gt;look cheap...<br></blockquote>
&gt;<p>

CONFIDENTAIL<br>
Trial Exhibit 563, Page 1 of 1<br>
OAGOOGLE0004633849<br>

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

2012-04-26 - I'll do this day
Authored by: naka on Saturday, May 19 2012 @ 05:06 PM EDT
<b>From:</b> Lino Persi
&lt;lino.persi@sun.com&gt;<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Mon Sep 24 2007 21:33:37 PDT<br>
<b>To:</b> Leo.Cizek@Sun.COM
&lt;leo.cizek@sun.com&gt;<br>
<b>CC:</b> Vineet Gupta - OEM Software Sales CTO/Worldwide SE
Director &lt;vineet.gupta@sun.com&gt;<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: Google's Mobility Push<br>
<b>Attachments:</b><p>

<b>Importance:</b> Normal<br>
<b>Priority:</b> Normal<br>
<b>Sensitivity:</b> None<p>

Awesome, thanks Vineet<p>

<br>
Leo.Cizek@Sun.COM wrote:<p>

<blockquote>&gt;Thanks, Vineet!<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;Vineet Gupta - OEM Software Sales CTO/Worldwide SE Director
wrote:<br>
&gt;<br><blockquote>
&gt;&gt;Leo,<br>
&gt;&gt;Please see email below. Am working with JS to get message to
Eric S.<br>
&gt;&gt;to enable us to get in at higher level.<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;-Vineet<br>
&gt;&gt;<blockquote>
&gt;&gt;&gt;-------- Original Message --------<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;Subject: Re: thanks for stopping by<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:39:06 -0700<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;From: Vineet Gupta - OEM Software Sales CTO/Worldwide SE
Director<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&lt;vineet.gupta@sun.com&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;To: Jonathan Schwartz
&lt;jis@Sun.COM&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;CC: Rich Green
&lt;Richard.Green@Sun.com&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;Thanks Jonathan - yes from a mobile
standpoint:<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;o) would love to partner on Google Apps available at a
Resident App<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;levle in JavaFX Mobile<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;o) would like to see if they are interested in AdSence
(TB/Google Ad<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;engine) integrated in our JavaFX Modile<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;Seperately they continue to work on G-Phone - and their
engg has not<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;been open to re-engage - so don't know if they continue
on the path of<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;a javascript/java bytecode minging CDC JVM or have moved
to Ajax or<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;something else. If they end up creating a munge - it
will end up in a<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;discussion around compatibility and licensing around
Java.<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
;<p>

CONFIDENTIAL<br>
Trial Exhibit 565, Page 1 of 4<br>
OAGOOGLE0004781928<br>
<hr>
<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>&gt;&gt;&gt;I
will push from Priti's side as well.<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;Thanks,<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;-Vineet<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;Jonathan Schwartz wrote:<blockquote>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;What I said to Amy(?) was - we're seeing a very
significant uptick in<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;Java distribution and updates, along with a
sizeable acceleration of<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;OpenOffice usage - and in addition, we're
building a phone.<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;So we kinda/sorta have a relationship around the
first two, none<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;around the last and it's high time we figured
out how to build<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;something bigger than we're doing
today.<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;I'll send Eric a note with the same ping -
presuming we want more<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;opportunity to work together...<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;js<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;</blockquote>
&gt;&gt;&gt;</blockquote>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;Leo Cizek@sun.com wrote:<br>
&gt;&gt;<blockquote>
&gt;&gt;&gt;Hi Vineet,<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;Re your email below, I thought I would ask for your
updated<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;thoughts, now that the StarOffice deal is done (of
course,<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;the Java SE Embedded deal is not).<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;leo<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;On 08/02/07, Vineet Gupta, OEM Software Sale
CTO/Worldwide SE<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;Director wrote:<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<blockquote>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;So two sides to this coin (part of this is for
your other email Leo).<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;1) Google has made it known that they will do a
Google phone<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;(similar to iPhone). We think that it is similar
to what we were<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;trying to work with them on Project Android - as
a collaboration<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;between the two companies. It does compete with
Sun's Java DX<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;Mobile strategy at several levels.<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;2) If Google is still using Java in it - a) then
they have to come<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;for a license with us - and will need to be
compatible (and Andy<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;cannot say he is not aware of the licensing
requirements - as he<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;had to go thru this at Danger - and we discussed
this during<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;Project Android Phase, and then during the
Sun/Google collaboration<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;attempt as well). b) they will decide to go the
non-compliant,<br>
</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><
p>

CONFIDENTIAL<br>
Trial Exhibit 565, Page 2 of 4<br>
OAGOOGLE0004781929<br>
<hr>
<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;non-licensed route - then we will need to go
deal with them or<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;their handset vendor for IP issues. c) or they
leverage opensourced<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;PhoneMe - and we will have to wait and see if
they are following<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;all GPL rules requred.<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;3) I have sent emails to Andy requesting a
discussion around what<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;they are planning, and if they need Java
licensing and/or if they<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;are interested in partnering around JavaFX
mobile - with no<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;response. He actaully canceled my face 2 face
and requested an<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;email instead - which he did not respond to. I
have decided not to<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;call his cell - as we need to see what they are
doing - before I<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;escalate.<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;4) I need the SO deal done - before I raise a
stink - else we get<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;that deal entangled into the issues that are
bound to come up.<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;5) I also need to see how the embedded JavaSE
deal is going to end<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;up - to decide how much to pile on.<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;-Vineet<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;Lino Persi wrote:<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<blockquote>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;We gotta get in on this!!!!<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070802/tc_n
m/google_wireless_dc_6<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;LP<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;--<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&lt;http://www.java.com&gt;*<
br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;*<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;</blockquote>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;--<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;************************************************
*******<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;Vineet Gupta<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;WorldWide Sr. Director<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;Chief Strategy/Technology office<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;OEM Software Systems Engineering<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;SUN Microsystems<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;Vineet.Gupta@Sun.com<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;(408)404-8950<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;************************************************
*******<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;</blockquote>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
;<p>

CONFIDENTIAL<br>
Trial Exhibit 565, Page 3 of 4<br>
OAGOOGLE00047881930<br>
<hr>
<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>&gt;&gt;&gt;Le
o Cizek<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;Account Manager<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;OEM Software Sales<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;Sun Microsystems<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;Cell: (415) 806-9009<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;</blockquote>
&gt;&gt;--<br>
&gt;&gt;******************************************************<br>

&gt;&gt;Vineet Gupta<br>
&gt;&gt;WorldWide Sr. Director<br>
&gt;&gt;Chief Strategy/Technology officer<br>
&gt;&gt;OEM Software Systems Engineers<br>
&gt;&gt;SUN Microsystems<br>
&gt;&gt;Vineet.Gupta@Sun.Com<br>
&gt;&gt;(408)404-8950<br>
&gt;&gt;******************************************************<br>

&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;</blockquote>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;--<br>
&gt;Leo Cizek<br>
&gt;Account Manager<br>
&gt;OEM Software Sales<br>
&gt;Sun Microsystems<br>
&gt;Cell: (415) 806-9009<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
</blockquote><p>

CONFIDENTIAL<br>
Trial Exhibit 565 Page 4 of 4<br>
OAGOOGLE0004781931<br>

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

1055 as text
Authored by: naka on Saturday, May 19 2012 @ 05:34 PM EDT
<b>From:</b> Jonathan Schwartz
&lt;jis@sun.com&gt;<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Mon Nov 12 2007 19:07:33 PST<br>
<b>To:</b> Karen Kahn &lt;karen.kahn@sun.com&gt;<br>
<b>CC:</b> Anil Gadre &lt;anil.gadre@sun.com&gt;; Rich Green
&lt;rich.green@sun.com&gt;;Jacquelyn Decoster<br>
&lt;jacki.decoster@sun.com&gt;; Ingrid Van Den Hoogen
&lt;ingrid.vandenhoogen@sun.com&gt;;Frank<br>
Smith &lt;franke.smith@sun.com&gt;<br>
<b>Subject</b> Re: Google & SDK Announcement<br>
<b>Attachments:</b><p>

<b>Importance:</b> Normal<br>
<b>Priotity</b> Normal<br>
<b>Sensitivity:</b> None<p>

A separate implementation isn't a fork - so long as Google agrees to<br>
certify their platform as compliant with the Java specification. If<br>
they don't, they won't be able to call it Java - we should ask the<br>
press to ask Google if their platform will be compliant with the Java<br>
specification. Let's get the on defense...<p>

&quot;The Java community has never been stronger - Google's endorsement
of<br>
the platform gives yet more opportunity to developers wanting to<br>
capitalize on the billions of decives running the Java platform<br>
around the world.&quot;<p>

<p>

On Nov 12, 2007, at 6:09 PM, Karen Kahn wrote:<br>
<blockquote>
&gt;fyi on cnet story that just posted. working with software team
on<br>
&gt;updated version of partyline to better scope out our
position.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;Jacquelyn Decoster wrote:<blockquote><br>
&gt;&gt;Google made their SDK announcement today. Shankland just posted
a<br>
&gt;&gt;story saying that it looks like Google is going to fork
Java.<br>
&gt;&gt;(Article pasted below) http://www.news.com/<br>
&gt;&gt;8301-13580_3-9815495-39.html?tag=blog.3 [Ed note: <a
href="http://www.news.com/8301-13580_3-9815495-39.html?tag=blog.3">
link</a>]<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;Rich Green is quoted in the CNET story based on a comment he
have<br>
&gt;&gt;Dawn Kawamoto last week during the OOW pre-brief interview.
His<br>
&gt;&gt;quote and the Sun positioning is accurate:<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&quot;For its part, Sun supports Java and open-source
software on<br>
&gt;&gt;mobile devices, but expressed some caution about joining
Google's<br>
&gt;&gt;alliance. &quot;We were interested in being part of the
Google<br>
&gt;&gt;ecosystem, but we were interested in getting more clarity on
what<br>
&gt;&gt;this program entails,&quot; said Rich Green, executive vice
president<br>
&gt;&gt;of Sun's softwrae effort.&quot;<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;Paryline on this will follow.<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;November 12, 2007 4:26 PM
PST</blockquote></blockquote><p>

CONFIDENTIAL<br>
Trial Exhibit 1055, Page 1 of 4<br>
OAGOOGLE0004646434<br>
<hr>
<blockquote><blockquote>
&gt;&gt;Google's Android parts ways with Java industry group<br>
&gt;&gt;Posted by Stephen Shankland<p>

[Ed note: The rest of this email just quotes the <a
href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-9815495-39.html?tag=blog.3">
;linked article.</a>
The article mentions a correction on Google's JCP status; the text explaining
the correction isn't included but the relevant paragraph is the same.]
</blockquote></blockquote>

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

1056.html
Authored by: naka on Saturday, May 19 2012 @ 05:53 PM EDT
<b>From:</b> Jonathan Schwartz
&lt;jis@sun.com&gt;<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wed Mar 26 2008 17:20:12 PDT<br>
<b>To:</b> Marten Mickos &lt;marten@mysql.com&gt;<br>
<b>CC:</b> Greg Papadopoulous
&lt;greg.papadopoulos@sun.com&gt;<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: no doubt you saw...<br>
<b>Attachments:</b><p>

<b>Importance:</b> Normal<br>
<b>Priority:</b> Normal<br>
<b>Sensitivity:</b> None<p>

I so totally agree with you. We all do.<p>

They also take Java for Android, without attribution or contribution.<p>

This is why I love scroogle :-)<p>

http://www.scroogle.org/cgi-bin/scraper.html<p>

On Mar 26, 2008, at 1:13 PM, Marten Mickos write:<p>

<blockquote>
&gt; It's funny with Google. They take (without paying):<br>
&gt;* the FOSS code of 10 million developers<br>
&gt;* the web contents of 100 million websites<br>
&gt;* the searches of 1,000 million web users<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;and add some magic of their own, after which they sell ads on
this<br>
&gt;to some 0.1 million companies. And everyone is happy.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;///mgm<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;Jonathan Schwartz wrote:<blockquote>
&gt;&gt;...was with my Google buddy over the weekend, and we got to
talking<br>
&gt;&gt;about licenses. He made some pretty interesting comments
about<br>
&gt;&gt;their internal (as communicated by senior mgrs) view of
licenses.<br>
&gt;&gt;They hate GPL, they like Apache, and they love BSD.<br>
&gt;&gt;Just like Microsoft...<br>
&gt;&gt;On Mar 25, 2008, at 8:12 AM, Marten Mickos
wrote:<blockquote>
&gt;&gt;&gt;Jonathan,<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;Yep. Expected.<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;They have spent $27m investing in the EnterpriseDB brand
and now<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;they switch to &quot;Postgres
Plus&quot;.<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;The list of Postgres attempts is getting
long:<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;* Great Bridge in the early
2000s</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><p>

CONFIDENTIAL<br>
Trial Exhibit 1056, Page 1 of 2<br>
OAGOOGLE0004653432<br>
<hr>
<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>
&gt;&gt;&gt;* Red Had had &quot;Red Hat
Database&quot;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;* Progress had UltraSQL<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;* CommandPrompt had MammothSQL<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;* Pervasive sold Postgres support for a while<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;* EnterpriseDB has Postgres Plus<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;* in Canada there is a PosgreSQL Inc<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;* and probably some more<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;///mgm<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;Jonathan Schwartz wrote:<blockquote>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;
http://www.news.com/newsblog/8301-10784_3-9901973-7.html<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;from where I sit... the weird thing about
Postgres is that the<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;copyright isn't owned by a company, it's owned
by a collective - <br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;via a BSD license that seems to spawn lots of
small companies,<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;but no center of mass... allowing us to say
&quot;we suppo<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;Postgres,&quot; and putting folks like
EnterpriseDB into a position of<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;always having to explain who they
are...</blockquote>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;--<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;Marten Mickos, SVP, Database Group, Sun
Microsystems<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;</blockquote></blockquote>
&gt;<br>
&gt;--<br>
&gt;Marten Mickos, SVP, Database Group, Sun
Microsystems</blockquote><p>

CONFIDENTIAL<br>
Trial Exhibit 1056, Page 2 of 2<br>
OAGOOGLE0004653433

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

2012-04-26 - Summary list
Authored by: naka on Saturday, May 19 2012 @ 06:11 PM EDT

0016 - Email from Vineet Gupta to Jonathan Schwartz, dated Feb 09 2006, subject: 'Re: Fwd: Potential Sun Google partnership in the Mobile Java and OS Space'

0563 - Email from Jonathan Schwartz to Scott McNealy, dated Mar 08 2007, subject: 'Re: plane'. Jonathan complains about Google's copyright attitude.

0565 - Email from Lino Persi to Leo Cizek, dated Sep 24 2007, subject: 'Re: Google's Mobility Push'. Is mostly a conversation between Gupta, Cizek, Persi and Schwartz sketching out ideas for licensing strategy.

0917 - Open Letter to Sun Microsystems, by The Apache Software Foundation. Link [Ed: I didn't do this as text because the text is available on Apache's site]

1055 - Email from Jonathan Schwartz to Karen Kahn, dated Nov 12 2007, subject: 'Re: Google & SDK Announcement'. Discusses a CNET article "Google's Android parts ways with Java industry group" and Schwartz clarifies his perspective on forking/compliance.

1056 - Email from Jonathan Schwartz to Marten Mickos, dated Mar 26 2008, subject: 'Re: no doubt you saw...'. Mickos and Schwartz discuss Postgres forks/companies, Google's preferred licensing, and Google's trend of taking things without paying.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Broken links
Authored by: naka on Saturday, May 19 2012 @ 06:21 PM EDT

Just when I thought I was done I discovered that there are four more exhibits that I didn't notice because their links don't work. They are 2070, 2195, 2341, and 2371.

BTW, any comments/suggestions on how the HTML style of the exhibits I've done can be improved are welcome.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

The rest of the summary
Authored by: naka on Saturday, May 19 2012 @ 09:19 PM EDT
070 - Email thread between Vineet Gupta, Brian Sutphin and Jonathan Schwartz.
Dated Oct 23 2008, subject: 'Re: STATUS: MS TB Side. -- call to Eric S. at G' -
There is some discussion about a TB contract with Microsoft, then the topic
changes to Android. Notable quotesfrom Gupta, "Eric, Jeet and myself -
proposed a joint collaboration on the on a single stack that combined Java and
Android into a single platform (Linux+JVM+dalvik extensions+Java APIs+Android
APIs+Android Apps) - available thru Apache license - and having a single
AppStore jointly owned." "Now Andy - wants the entire eco-system to be
available for free - i.e. no connections to monetization" "So either
we find a way to work together - or they become our biggest competition with
Android"

2195 - Email thread from Jonathan Schwartz to John Fowler, CC Rich Green, dated
Mar 04 2008, subject: Re: Google summer of code 2008. Notable quotes from
Schwartz, "They can create a Java implementation, have it pass the
TCKs/etc., but they're not allowed to use our brand without a commercial license
- thus they perceive a restriction on the 'field of use' allowable for
Harmony." ... "But the code's available, to be clear - just not the
brand."

2341 - Article from physorg.com: http://www.physorg.com/news97927195.html
titled 'Sun Reveals a Slew of Moves at JavaOne' The article is about Sun
releasing the JDK under GPLv2

2371 - Email thread between Jonathan Schwartz and John Markoff, dated Nov 06
2007, subject 'Re: I don't get it?' - Markoff asks, "How the heck is Java
going to be part of the Apache distro that the Android software is being given
away under? Is this a legal issue between you and Google? How come they are
using Java and you aren't part of their Alliance?" Schwartz replies,
"off the record... God knows. They didn't want us to open source
Java," and "As for how they avoid those licenses, I don't know -
they've show a frankly stunning naivete about free software"


--
I don't have time to do the rest of the text today but I will try and look at it
tonight.

[ 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 )