The confusion over Java is, IMHO, deliberate to confuse the
issues regarding patents and copyright - the Java
specification (a written document) may be copyrighted, but
the Java language is not //should not be. Java bytecode
should definitely not be.
Estoppel and Laches is very important - they are defenses
for violation. Schwartz, the CEO with the ultimate
authority to make decisions, on a Sun public relations
website (his blog, which Sun characterized as official
publication site in their 10K) stated he was fine with such
actions. Sun, as a company, acted as if they did not
consider it a violation worth going after - they never sued
over Harmony, which they certainly knew about (Apache was on
the JCB).
An example based on reality: You own a piece of property,
and I walk across it. You tell me it's OK, you say "Hi" to
me crossing it. For years this continues, with you greeting
me and letting me walk across it. Suddenly you have me
arrested for trespassing, and claim I've been trespassing
for years. I claim that yes, I crossed your property, but
with the implied consent of you - based on your statements,
your knowledge, and the fact that for years you knowingly,
visibly allowed me to cross. Do you claim I could not win?
That's what estoppel and laches is about - not that the
violation didn't occur, but that it occurred in an
authorized manner, based on (in this case) Sun's ongoing
actions and statements. The jury decided they had copied -
but deadlocked on whether Google had fair use defense.
---
(Note IANAL, I don't play one on TV, etc, consult a practicing attorney, etc,
etc)
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
