Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
Jerry Feldman wrote: > But, since Oracle is claiming the API is patented... I haven't read the groklaw coverage, but I haven't seen that claimed elsewhere. Bill Bogstad wrote: >Edward Ned Harvey wrote: >> The main question of interest will be whether or not the API is patentable. > > As I understand it, even software patents have to do with actually > "doing" something. An API doesn't actually do anything, it is the > underlying implementation that does. If I could claim patent on an > API, it would seem to me that I could claim your book describing my > API violated my patent as well. > > In any case, I think it is Google's actual Dalvik VM that might be > subject to Oracle's patents (and part of this lawsuit); but I don't > think the API is relevant to patents. This matches my understanding. Edward Ned Harvey wrote: > Even if an API is copyrightable, we've already concluded it's easily > circumventable. Renaming the functions largely defeats the point to using an existing API. If you are going to do that, you'd be better off playing it safe and just do a "clean room" design of your own API. Edward Ned Harvey wrote: > Tom Metro wrote: >> Sun granted a royalty-free license to use the applicable patents to >> everyone, regardless of whether they are using OpenJDK or not. > > Question: Do you think Google is going to be permitted to sell licenses > of something Sun patented, when Sun conditioned the free use upon the > GPL and Sun sells it under some other license? No way man. Right, seems unlikely, but... > If Sun granted royalty-free license to use and distribute the > (patented) application under the terms of GPL, then the royalty-free > (patent) license would be conditioned on the continued compliance to > GPL by whoever received it. Sounds logical, but where is the document that stipulates that. (GPLv2 by itself doesn't.) This is not a case of a license granted to only a few parties, negotiated behind closed doors. Instead it is a "drive by" license where any visitor to the OpenJDK site can download the JDK and be governed by the legal documents provided on that site and bundled with the code. -Tom -- Tom Metro Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA "Enterprise solutions through open source." Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |