Reuters
OK, am I the only person who read this and got a kind of sick panicky feeling? The implications here are unsettling to say the least, and potentially dire. To the corporate watchers out there, I guess this looks like just another drama for the industry big boys. But for those of us who use Java to get things done, I'm really afraid that the stakes could be a lot higher than that. Maybe I'm overreacting, but what are the limits on Oracle here? And given those limits, where will they stop?
Seems to me that anyone who relies on Java could wind up in Oracle's sights, which means, um.. all of us. I don't know about the rest of you, but I've been under the willful misconception that Java was for all intents and purposes a truly open platform. Or at least an open standard.
But to me the scariest thing about this suit is Oracle went after Google not for using Sun's Java but for creating a JDK implementation of their own. One that can't even run unmodified Java byte code. Now, we all know that Oracle owns most of the Java implementations we're using. But in the back of our minds was the idea that we could always bail for an Open Source clean room JDK. But how's an Open Source JDK ever going to be truly clean? Who hasn't looked at the Java code?
Even is Oracle and Google settle, Oracle has opened a door that they're going to have a very hard time closing. Needless to say most of the case seems to be based on software patents -- and patents are the ultimate bad news for the little guys who just want to build something cool and share it with others. Are we all going to wake up tomorrow and discover that Oracle believes they own a slice of everything we've done for the last decade? Is this the point at which we all begin to look for an exit strategy? Is there one that doesn't mean starting all over? I don't know about you, but if I had to choose between that and being owned the choice would be pretty clear.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Popular Posts
-
Or something like that.. In this article, I'm going to describe an easy way to create wizards for end-users to create their own plugin p... -
Many of us who've spent time traipsing through the Eclipse wilderness are probably familiar with this story... Tis a beautiful, sunlit...
-
Hi all. I wanted to let folks know about a new project proposal I'm considering, and ask for your feedback and support. I'm really h...
-
The resource model is one of those aspects of the Eclipse Modeling Framework that is extremely powerful yet can seem way too complicated for...
-
I've been spending quite a bit of time lately playing with the EEF framework. C'est magnifique! (No, I don't actually know any f... -
How much has Gerrit changed software development? Well, consider that a couple of years ago most of us had never heard of Gerrit, and now it... -
In my post earlier this week I sighed about the incompatibilities between GPL and EPL, took the FSF to task for their (in my eyes anyway) d...
-
“So the final lesson of 1918, a simple one yet the one most difficult to execute, is that those who occupy positions of authority must lesse...
-
Every once an a while, a new way of thinking comes along that is so powerful, so unique, so practical -- just so damn cool, really -- that i... -
In my last post , I described the current state of Eclipse Gerrit adoption. If you haven't read that post, you might be as surprised as...
imho that shouldn't be really a problem because java was released under the gpl license
ReplyDelete-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenJDK
But doesn't that means that in order to be protected, one has to be using the GPL license? And since you are linking to software APIs covered under that license you would be condemned to releasing your whole software stack under GPL. Now that would be an interesting twist -- not necessarily pleasant but interesting.
ReplyDeleteAre you building a jvm to compete against Oracle in the hand held market? This is what Google did. Oracle says that Google employed Oracle patents to do so. Is that what you plan to do? If you are going to write a vm to interpret java bytecode, write a clean room and be certain not to hire former Sun employees, who filed the patents. Are you planning for income of plus 10B USD? Google does with Android. I think every one of the million plus java developers are not doing what Google is being accused of doing: competing with Oracle using patents belonging to Oracle to earn $10B USD. I'd say you should read the complaint.
ReplyDeleteJohn, thanks for sharing your thoughts, but with respect, the issue isn't about the complaint per se. It's about what Oracle is capable of doing and what they are willing to do. The patents they are using to go after Google are not ME patents. See my comments on Colebourne's blog for more on that.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.jroller.com/scolebourne/entry/power_corrupts_absolute_power_corrupts
My sense is -- and pleas correct me if I'm wrong -- that your argument boils down to "Oracle isn't suing you, so why do you care?" I care because they've demonstrated that they are willing to use patents in aggressive pursuit of their short-term gain. And they are using patents that are both common techniques and necessary for implementing a good Java tool or an any other VM.
That matters to me for at least two reasons. It means that innovation in VMs and other technologies is going to lose out. Even the most pro Patent commentators are saying clearly that this is going to have a chilling effect.
But much more importantly, as a small software developer it also means that if I ever succeed in getting under the radar of Oracle, they won't hesitate to dive into their portfolio of patents to attack me. You know how it works -- the big cases set the precedence and then corporate lawyers can use those precedents to go after the little fish. Oracle is demonstrating that that is clearly the kind of game that they are happy to pay. Now if Larry Ellison were willing to make a pledge not to sue any companies with a Market Cap below 10B, I might feel differently..
By the way, as to the somewhat unrelated merits of the case, this case is by definition public, so I'm not really sure why it is relevant wether one hired former Sun employees or not. Oracle isn't claiming trade secrets here.
For the Android market, this is indeed a dark cloud.
ReplyDeleteFor the Java market, not more than for other markets using similar technologies (.Net for one). But I don't think Oracle will go berzerk using every patent in Sun's portfolio to attack competitors (not only for Java, but Solaris and other things). This attack on Google sounds more like a last resort after Google refused to play nice.
@id That is certainly a reasonable point of view and I'll admit that my position is more toward the risk sensitive or even paranoid side. Though Andy Grove's words on that subject carry greater and greater weight every day I think.
ReplyDeleteBut my concern is more general. I see this fundamentally as an issue of what companies can do under current law and what they are willing to do when it is in their interest. I think I should be clear that while the current bogeyman is Oracle, and while I and many others think that Oracle is a particularly bad actor, the fundamental evil if you will lays with the system itself. It is just that Oracles action here is so over the top in terms of what has been done in the past that I think it rises to the level of a fundamental test of what we can and cannot accept within a healthy software ecosystem.
So from the perspective of market innovation I'd like to separate out the issue of the size and dominance of the companies from the technology involved. Imagine that the company was not Google, but a couple of guys who got together in a garage and came up with the idea of creating a virtual machine based phone operating system that would be totally open so that anyone could develop applications for it. Realizing that Sun could at some point use their patents as a bludgeon against them if they based the system on the Java JDK.. well, you know the rest of the story. But as their company got bigger and bigger they begin to challenge the existing hegemony. Perhaps Apple began to see a strategic threat to the iPhone, acquired Sun and sued this small and growing company.
Now -- and this isn't a rhetorical question -- would you feel any differently about this scenario? Here Apple would be acting completely rationally, and it is not unreasonable to think that things would play out that way.
If we then take this to a wider context, we need to remember that the large technology companies own literally tens of thousands of patents. Out of those many tens of thousands of patents some number could be taken up that would apply to almost any innovation. Take that with the fact that people who form startups often have past work experiences with companies working on the same kinds of technologies. This means that almost any small innovative company from day one sits under a dark cloud.