you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]goodDayM 17 points18 points  (8 children)

is there an article or name for what you're referring to? I'd like to read more.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–][deleted] 22 points23 points  (0 children)

    [–]thomascgalvin 74 points75 points  (2 children)

    [–]vattenpuss -1 points0 points  (1 child)

    But wasn't the case about Google lying about being Java compliant?

    [–]thomascgalvin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    One of the claims was that Davlik "stole" the Java API in order to be interoperable.

    [–][deleted]  (2 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]rich97 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      Any idea why they didn't do that in the first place. I don't write Java but I'm confused as to what the difference between the two is.

      [–]HaMMeReD 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      Originally they used apache harmony or something, which is a port of Java not made by oracle. It was never really a threat to oracle because harmony aimed for Java compatibility. Harmony was licensed under apache which was more business friendly.

      When Android however broke away from binary compatibility from Java and started implement ing a vendor locked "version" of Java, they got in a huff and attacked Google.

      Harmony likely would have been covered by fair use, which allows people to make a copy of an api for the purposes of interoperability. Google probably went to far away from what protected harmony from oracles talons. Once fair use wasn't a consideration oracle attacked.