[ale] Fwd: Google and Oracle battle over the future of Android

Thu Apr 19 21:46:51 EDT 2012

You can run Android apps on bluestack on windoze. Is that also in violation?

On 4/19/12, Stephen Haywood <stephen at averagesecurityguy.info> wrote:
> Google is heavy into python. I wonder if they could use python where they
> would normally use java and then put in an interpreter that would allow
> older apps to still run. May be way off base here so feel free to point and
> laugh.
>
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Jim Kinney <jim.kinney at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> More reasons to never use a language "owned" by a company and not a
>> foundation.
>>
>> Having said that, I'm not sure I can adequately explain my thinking on the
>> difference between a company and a foundation. It really more of an
>> altruistic intent as a dividing line between the two in my mind; something
>> created to solve a problem vs. something created to create a revenue
>> stream. Not that either is exclusive of the other but the original intent
>> seems to take dominance over time.
>>
>> Besides, starbucks can't make good java so why does oracle think they can
>> do any better?
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Ron Frazier (ALE) <
>> atllinuxenthinfo at techstarship.com> wrote:
>>
>>> **
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> This is from the AJUG group.  I thought you guys might like to see it.  I
>>> hope Oracle doesn't kill the market for Java since I'm about to get
>>> serious
>>> about learning it.
>>>
>>> Apologies for the HTML nature of the message if that causes anyone
>>> problems.  That's the way it came into my mailbox.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>> Ron
>>>
>>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------  Subject: [ajug-members] Google and
>>> Oracle battle over the future of Android  Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012
>>> 15:55:49 +0000  From: Gabsaga Tata
>>> <gabsaga.tata at simpaq.com><gabsaga.tata at simpaq.com>  Reply-To:
>>> ajug-members at ajug.org  To: ajug-members at ajug.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   http://money.cnn.com/2012/04/16/technology/google-oracle/index.htm
>>>
>>>  Google and Oracle battle over the future of Android
>>> By David Goldman <david.goldman at turner.com>
>>> @CNNMoneyTech<https://twitter.com/intent/user?screen_name=cnnmoneytech>April
>>> 17, 2012: 3:49 PM ET
>>>  [image: Google CEO Larry Page (left) and Oracle CEO Larry Ellison will
>>> testify against one another in the coming weeks.]
>>> Google CEO Larry Page (left) and Oracle CEO Larry Ellison will testify
>>> against one another in the coming weeks.
>>>  NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- A landmark court battle between Google and
>>> Oracle has begun -- and its result will shape the future of the Android
>>> ecosystem fueling most of the world's smartphones.
>>> Silicon Valley's power players are always in the throes of nasty patent
>>> fights against each
>>> other<http://us.mg4.mail.yahoo.com/2011/08/18/technology/patent_bubble/index.htm>,
>>> but this one is especially potent. Oracle claims that Google's Android
>>> violates two patents plus several copyrights that Oracle holds on its
>>> Java
>>> software, a ubiquitous programming language powering everything from
>>> phones
>>> to websites.
>>>
>>>  Although both Java and Android are open-source
>>> platforms<http://us.mg4.mail.yahoo.com/2010/08/13/technology/oracle_android/index.htm>--
>>> neither Google (
>>> GOOG<http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=GOOG&source=story_quote_link>,
>>> Fortune
>>> 500<http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2011/snapshots/11207.html?source=story_f500_link>)
>>> nor Oracle
>>> (ORCL<http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=ORCL&source=story_quote_link>,
>>> Fortune
>>> 500<http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2011/snapshots/3057.html?source=story_f500_link>)
>>> generally charge for their use -- their licensing terms are complex and
>>> precise. When Java creator Sun Microsystems (acquired by
>>> Oracle<http://us.mg4.mail.yahoo.com/2009/04/20/technology/Oracle_Sun/index.htm>in
>>> 2010) set Java loose as open-source software, it left significant limits
>>> in place around the mobile version.
>>> Companies building on top of Java's mobile platform typically pay to
>>> license it. Google used an elaborate workaround and essentially built
>>> its own
>>> version<http://www.betaversion.org/%7Estefano/linotype/news/110/>of a key
>>> system to avoid those licensing fees and restrictions.
>>> Oracle cried foul and hauled Google off to court -- a move some expected
>>> from the moment it agreed to buy Sun.
>>> "During the integration meetings between Sun and Oracle where we were
>>> being grilled about the patent situation between Sun and Google, we could
>>> see the Oracle lawyer's eyes sparkle," James Gosling, one of Java's
>>> original architects, wrote on his
>>> blog<http://nighthacks.com/roller/jag/entry/the_shit_finally_hits_the>the
>>> day the lawsuit was announced.
>>> After 20 months of prep work and a blizzard of court documents, the trial
>>> between the two tech titans kicked off Monday in San Francisco.
>>> Google insists its approach to building Android -- now the most popular
>>> smartphone platform in the
>>> world<http://us.mg4.mail.yahoo.com/2011/03/07/technology/android/index.htm>--
>>> did not infringe either Java's rules or Oracle's patents, and it thinks
>>> Oracle's copyright claims are a sham. It called Oracle's arguments "a
>>> classic attempt to improperly assert copyright over an idea rather than
>>> expression."
>>> But Oracle thinks it's got a smoking gun: An e-mail sent from Google
>>> engineer Tim Lindholm to Android chief Andy Rubin just days before Oracle
>>> filed its suit. Warned in advance by Oracle that it believed Google was
>>> infringing its patents, Google asked Lindholm to investigate its options.
>>> He didn't like any of them.
>>> "What we've actually been asked to do [by CEO Larry Page and co-founder
>>> Sergey Brin] is to investigate what technical alternatives exist to Java
>>> for Android and Chrome," Lindholm wrote. "We've been over a bunch of
>>> these,
>>> and think they all suck. We conclude that we need to negotiate a license
>>> for Java under the terms we need."
>>> Google fought to keep that e-mail out of
>>> bounds<http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20120206194613886>,
>>> but lost.
>>> 0:00/3:33Patent baron Myhrvold defends the system
>>> If its lawsuit is successful, Oracle could force Google to pay it tens of
>>> millions of dollars in retroactive licensing fees and potentially
>>> hundreds
>>> of millions more in the future.
>>> But this isn't simply a damages case. Oracle already makes plenty of
>>> money. Adding to its stash would be a nice perk, but it's not the main
>>> motive for its legal crusade.
>>> Oracle is picking a fight with Google because it feels that Android is
>>> threatening the Java platform it got as part of its blockbuster $7.4
>>> billion Sun purchase. Android may be an off-shoot of Java, but its
>>> interface and functionality is unique. Code written for Java is not
>>> inherently compatible with Android -- and as Android grows, its version
>>> of
>>> Java threatens to become the dominant one.
>>> Oracle doesn't want to kill Android, but it wants to force Google to play
>>> by its rules and make Android compatible with the rest of Java.
>>> That would be extremely difficult for Google and the Android community.
>>> Each of the nearly 500,000 Android apps out there would have to be
>>> rewritten or tweaked.
>>> But for Oracle, it would be a coup. Developers would be able to write
>>> apps around Java's programming interfaces that would also run seamlessly
>>> on
>>> Android devices.
>>> "That would transcend whatever Google ultimately could pay Oracle," says
>>> Florian Mueller, an independent intellectual property analyst and
>>> consultant.
>>> New technologies like HTML5 are already making Java less important on the
>>> Web. Oracle wants to make sure it doesn't lose the rapidly growing mobile
>>> market as well.
>>> Whatever the outcome, don't expect a big decision any time soon.
>>> With so much at stake, experts like Mueller think that this case will get
>>> stuck in the courts for years. The two sides -- neither known for backing
>>> away from a fight -- will most likely battle and appeal their way
>>> straight
>>> up to the Supreme Court. [image: To top of
>>> page]<http://us.mg4.mail.yahoo.com/neo/#TOP>
>>> First Published: April 17, 2012: 2:36 PM ET
>>>
>>>
>>>  __._,_.___
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> (To whom it may concern.  My email address has changed.  Replying to
>>> former
>>> messages prior to 03/31/12 with my personal address will go to the wrong
>>> address.  Please send all personal correspondence to the new address.)
>>>
>>> (PS - If you email me and don't get a quick response, you might want to
>>> call on the phone.  I get about 300 emails per day from alternate energy
>>> mailing lists and such.  I don't always see new messages very quickly.)
>>>
>>> Ron Frazier
>>> 770-205-9422 (O)   Leave a message.
>>> linuxdude AT techstarship.com
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ale mailing list
>>> Ale at ale.org
>>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>>> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
>>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> James P. Kinney III
>>
>> As long as the general population is passive, apathetic, diverted to
>> consumerism or hatred of the vulnerable, then the powerful can do as they
>> please, and those who survive will be left to contemplate the outcome.
>> - *2011 Noam Chomsky
>>
>> http://heretothereideas.blogspot.com/
>> *
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ale mailing list
>> Ale at ale.org
>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Stephen Haywood
> Information Security Consultant
> CISSP, GPEN, OSCP
> T: @averagesecguy
> W: averagesecurityguy.info
>

-- 

Justin Goldberg

*justgold79 at gmail.com*
(504) 208-1158
http://gplus.to/goldberg
http://twitter.com/justingoldberg