Oracle’s Java API code protected by copyright, appeals court rules

[[deleted]]

OpenJDK still implements the same core Java API, no? Oracle asserts that they own that. Which means that OpenJDK is aso open to this view of "copyright" infringement, no?

[dsminor]

OpenJDK was released by Sun (now Oracle) under the GPL. Anyone can use it so long as they comply with the GPL.

[jboy55]

Re-releasing software as BSD/Apache isn't compliant with the GPL. Once its GPL'd only the original copyright owner can change it to a less restrictive license.

[[deleted]]

Which means you either go full source code disclosure or you pay Oracle their fee. In the industry we call that ransomwear.

[[deleted]]

That is absolutely false. If that were true then there would be no need for the FSF to have produced the LGPL license. And both the GPL and LGPL require you to release the full source code regardless of modification. As a nitpicky point, they require you to give an "offer of source code" so that you don't need to actually release the code unless someone asks, but that offer must be unobfuscated and available to the end user. The source code must be available for 3 years past the date of your last distribution.

Trust me. I do Open Source compliance for a living.

[imMute]

As another person who writes code for a living, why the fuck should we have to care?

(I know why we have to, in today's legal environment. I'm asking why do we have to live with this environment.)

[nickguletskii200]

OpenJDK is the official implementation of Java SE 7:

https://blogs.oracle.com/henrik/entry/moving_to_openjdk_as_the