It's zombie project because it makes no sense to keep it alive... [LWN.net]

It's zombie project because it makes no sense to keep it alive...

Posted Aug 14, 2010 11:30 UTC (Sat) by paulj (subscriber, #341)
In reply to: It's zombie project because it makes no sense to keep it alive... by khim
Parent article: Oracle sues Google over use of Java in Android (ars technica)

That doesn't make sense. We now know that anyone who wants to develop a JVM (or similar) has to worry about 2 kinds of Oracle patents:

1. The patents on things implemented already in the JDK

2. Other patents, which are not implemented in the JDK, some or all of which may be unknown, some or all of which may be irrelevant to JVMish developers.

For the former class of patents, you can *get* a licence from Oracle via the GPL, and that licence extends to derivation through modification of the work.

For the latter class, you have to either avoid them or get a licence from Oracle for the known ones that are applicable to you - the unknown ones you can do little about. You're in that boat regardless of whether or not you use GPL OpenJDK.

Surely the rational choice now would be for any future developers to ensure that at least Oracle can't shake you down on the former class, i.e. base work on the OpenJDK?

(Log in to post comments)

Sorry, but no...

Posted Aug 14, 2010 12:14 UTC (Sat) by khim (guest, #9252) [Link]

For the former class of patents, you can *get* a licence from Oracle via the GPL, and that licence extends to derivation through modification of the work.

There are two patent grants. One (implicit) does not extends to derivations (this is known GPLv2 loophole). Another is explicit - but it's only available for the "compliant implementations" which "pass all test suites". And said "test suites" are not open source, they are not available without written permission and so this promise is essentially pointless.

Surely the rational choice now would be for any future developers to ensure that at least Oracle can't shake you down on the former class, i.e. base work on the OpenJDK?

No. The rational choice is to drop Java ASAP. Java is new COBOL: useful for legacy systems, but quite pointless for the new development. You can continue to use it - but only as long as you base your work on modified (or slightly modified) OpenJDK.

This is beginning of the end for Java.

Sorry, but no...

Posted Aug 14, 2010 18:14 UTC (Sat) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]

This is an interesting theory, that the GPLv2 implicit grant doesn't extend to derivation. I think you must be utterly wrong on that, for the GPLv2 explicitly grants you the right to modify. So therefore, for any processes that are implemented within the code for which you receive an implicit GPLv2 patent grant, you must be able to modify the code implementing that process and retain the grant - that's what the licence tells you you may do, after all.

Perhaps there is some fine line you have to walk to stay within the bounds of "modification", and not appear to be a new implementation. A new implementation would, obviously, not be covered by such grants.

As for the TCK grant, I never referred to that all.

I see we're actually agreed now that this means future Java work pretty has to be on the OpenJDK, in order to be safe from Oracle lawsuits. Whether this means Java is doomed though, I don't know. As others have pointed out, perhaps if anything it means that the only way to be safe, if you want a Java style runtime, is to seek shelter in the corporate patent thickets erected around the Java JVM and C# CLR.

It will be interesting to see how this lawsuit pans out. On the one hand, if Google contested it and found a way to have it ruled these patents do not apply, then it would benefit everyone. OTOH, the easiest way out for Google perhaps is to settle and pay off Oracle (but would that mark Google out as an easy touch for trolls?).