Re: The Future of PHP

On 12/17/2010 10:37 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Erwin Moller wrote:

Does anybody know what the charges exactly mean that Oracle charged
against Google? It had to do with Java and Google's Android.

What I see happening:
1) Android is developed with Java. Everybody is happy.
2) Oracle buys Sun, and thus gets Java.
3) Oracle brings Google to the courtroom.

I am horribly bad at reading legal stuff, so somebody can explain it
to me in a more logical/clear way, please do.

When someone says it better than you can yourself, quote..;-)

"Oracle has mounted a no-holds-barred legal attack on Google's Android
operating system in a lawsuit that accuses the internet giant of
deliberately infringing patents and copyrights Oracle holds for the Java

In a complaint filed late Thursday, Oracle asked a federal court in
Northern California to seize all Android products and advertising, block
the further infringement of its intellectual property, and force Google
to pay hefty damages, including trebled patent damages because the
alleged misappropriation was willful. The action was filed on behalf of
Oracle subsidiary Oracle America, which obtained the Java rights with
the acquisition of Sun Microsystems in January.

"Without consent, authorization, approval, or license, Google knowingly,
willingly, and unlawfully copied, prepared, published, and distributed
Oracle America's copyrighted work, portions thereof, or derivative works
and continues to do so," Oracle attorneys, which include renowned
litigator David Boies, wrote. "Google's Android infringes Oracle
America's copyrights in Java and Google is not licensed to do so."

The unexpected move comes as sales of Android-based smartphones are
surging, inching past iPhone buyers in the second quarter of this year
and garnering a 27 per cent market share to the iPhone's 23 per cent. It
follows a series of patent suits and countersuits filed by and against
Apple over intellectual property for its handset.

The complaint asserts seven patents to various technologies associated
with Java, in addition to copyrighted code, documentation,
specifications, libraries, and other materials that comprise the
platform. Attorneys said the intellectual property is infringed by
various Java applications that make up the Android stack and run on a
Java-based object-oriented application framework. They also cited core
Android libraries that run on the Dalvik virtual machine, which features
just-in-time compilation.

"On information and belief, Google has purposefully, actively, and
voluntarily distributed Android and related applications, devices,
platforms, and services with the expectation that they will be
purchased, used or licensed by consumers in the Northern District of
California," the complaint stated. "By purposefully and voluntarily
distributing one or more of its infringing products and services, Google
has injured Oracle America and is thus liable to Oracle America for
infringement of the patents at issue in this litigation."

The legal broadside is in some ways reminiscent of the legal offensive
Sun launched against Microsoft in 1997 over the same technology. The two
companies spent the better part of a decade hashing out their
disagreements, and many of the most explosive allegations — that
Microsoft intentionally misappropriated Java to blunt its
write-once-run-anywhere promise — were later incorporated into an
antitrust lawsuit filed by the Justice Department and more than a dozen

Microsoft ultimately agreed to pay Sun $1bln to settle their
disagreements after the judge hearing the antitrust case ruled that
Microsoft was a monopolist that had acted illegally to preserve its
dominant position.

The patents in the case are 6,125,447, "Protection domains to provide
security in a computer system"; 6,192,476, "Controlling access to a
resource"; 5,966,702, "Method and apparatus for pre-processing and
packaging class files"; 7,426,720, "System and method for dynamic
preloading of classes through memory space cloning of a master runtime
system process"; RE38,104, "Method and apparatus for resolving data
references in generated code"; 6,910,205, "Interpreting functions
utilizing a hybrid of virtual and native machine instructions"; and
6,061,520, "Method and system for performing static initialization."

Google declined to comment."

It was worth it for a billion, last time.


Looks like it indeed. :-)

But this case is different because Android Phones didn't intentionally cripple Java, like early MS versions of 'Java' did.
I did some more reading and my new impression is this:

1) Google's Android is big, as is Google:it is multi-billion market.
2) As long as Oracle effectively spreads it FUD, sales might drop.
Potential customers might think: "Why buy a phone that is in legal trouble? Will it continue? etc". You know: All the intented effects of a successful FUD campaign.
3) Google calculates that settling the matter is cheaper than winning the battle in court (after 10 years).

But that might just be my paranoid worldview.

Erwin Moller

"There are two ways of constructing a software design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies. The first method is far more difficult."
-- C.A.R. Hoare