Must Read: Sorry, but bringing back the Start menu won't help Windows 8

Topic: Google

The deafening silence in the Oracle-Google lawsuit

Summary: Could this suit be a nonsense meant to rile people up, for the sake of riling them up, more for partisan advantage than anything else, for light rather than heat, because we can.

Dana Blankenhorn

By Dana Blankenhorn for Linux and Open Source |

Amid all the Sturm-und-Drang over the Oracle-Google suit, there are some voices notably absent.

The Free Software Foundation has not issued a press release. Neither has the Linux Foundation. Nor the Open Invention Network. Linux Defenders 911 has not replaced its penguin "bat signal" with a Drudge-like police strobe.

It's the mystery of the dogs that don't bark. Why? (Aren't these things from Babykind in the UK cute?)

You might reply, elementary my dear Watson. This isn't really an open source issue. Google is using Java ME, not the GPL version of Java, in Android.

Most reporters, of course, have gone all Inspector Lestrade on this story. (I include myself in this condemnation.) We are buying the Google line. Or predicting the end of open source. Depending on our views and preconceptions.

Without taking a firm stand on the merits of the case, Groklaw is also stoking the fires, writing that the end result of all this needs to be the end of software patents, which are now proven to hamper innovation. "Groklaw will cover this litigation soup to nuts," they add.

Surprise.

Individual advocates are speaking up, of course. Florian Mueller, who agrees with Groklaw on the evil of software patents, is attacking the OIN. Bradley Kuhn says it's a black mark against both Java and Google, as well as software patents.

But as I paged through all the news analyses yesterday (including our own), each using the controversy to promote their own agenda (page views in my case), a very strange thought occurred to me.

Could this be the anchor baby of open source advocacy? (You were wondering when those slippers would come back into the story, weren't you?)

That is, could this suit be a nonsense meant to rile people up, for the sake of riling them up, more for partisan advantage than anything else, for light rather than heat, because we can.

Until I hear something official from people who really matter -- folks like Eben Moglen, Jim Zemlin, and Keith Bergelt -- my suspicion of that is going to grow.

Topics: Google, Legal, Oracle

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

29 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion

  • RE: The deafening silence in the Oracle-Google lawsuit

    Dear Dana, actually Android does not use JavaME; it uses the default JavaSE environment (any you like) to convert from java source to JVM bytecode, then convers the JVM code into Dalvik codes that are then compacted in APK files. The execution engine is totally different from Java, and certainly not based on JavaME.
    cdaffara@...
    Reply Vote

    • in depth analysis

      @cdaffara@...
      for an in depth analysis of someone actually in the know, have a look here: http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2010/08/14/how-oracle-might-kill-googles-android-and-software-patents-all-at-once/
      banned from zdnet
      Reply Vote

      • RE: The deafening silence in the Oracle-Google lawsuit

        @banned from zdnet "in depth analysis of someone in the know"??? Actually, the post seems a little bit skewed. Not only its overall discussion of Android seem not very accurate ("it sells only because it is the only phone sold by Verizon"?) but the overall coverage of the patent issues, the history of Android, the role of Oracle in OSS communities seem written by my 5 year old daughter.
        For starters, it was not Google that "stole" Java; the Dalvik machine comes off the acquisition of Android Inc. by the very talented Andy Rubin. Android does not use any form of Java inside the VM, but only to convert source code into JVM bytecode using OpenJDK or the Sun VM, and then a second converter turns JVM bytecode into Dalvik, that is (given the fact that Daniel seems not to have looked into the code itself) quite different from Sun implementation. So, "Google took Sun?s Java and modified it to the point where it thought it wouldn?t have to pay Sun to license Java within Android." is quite unsubstantiated, and IMHO plain wrong. Also, the image of Oracle as OSS stalwart is a little bit strange, given the fact that after the Sun acquisition they disappeared from major projects like OpenOffice and OpenSolaris (forcing them to fork under the name Illumos). And OpenSSO, by the way (one of my favorite projects), and several others, including the HPC ones. Other comments, like "a dark cloud over the already dismal climate of the Android software platform" is hardly what would I call an unbiased analysis.
        I would not claim to be a perfect writer, but at least noone called me out for such an outright bias in my posts.
        cdaffara@...
        Reply Vote

      • RE: The deafening silence in the Oracle-Google lawsuit

        @banned from zdnet

        But he is NOT "in the know". Neither are you. Give up the pretense.
        mejohnsn
        Reply Vote

      • biased

        @cdaffara

        biased yes. but something your 5 year old could have written seems a bit off. he is certainly more in the know and insightful than any of the clueless bloggers here. would be interesting if someone like you with your knowledge would engage in the discussion at roughlydrafted.com
        banned from zdnet
        Reply Vote

      • RE: The deafening silence in the Oracle-Google lawsuit

        for partisan advantage than anything<a href="http://www.nerdysouthrecords.com/"><font color="light&amp;height"> about it</font></a> is bank that <a href="http://rabbiburton.com/"><font color="light&amp;height">website</font></a> attacked from the <a href="http://thescatterload.com/"><font color="light&amp;height">site support</font></a> from any soldier <a href="http://www.macnerdnews.com/"><font color="light&amp;height">site</font></a> to the light <a href="http://www.ventasyacom.com/"><font color="light&amp;height">home page</font></a> is great else
        musdahi
        Reply Vote

  • RE: The deafening silence in the Oracle-Google lawsuit

    The FSF it's against software patent, but also against using software under patent (or private software in general). Google on Android used Java, so why the FSF would have to intenrvene in this war between two private corporations (Google and Oracle)?
    idl3
    Reply Vote

    • Distinction between software patents and patent-encumbered software

      @idl3 You accurately portray the FSF's position but it's a utopian one (not your fault as the messenger). There is no such thing as patent-unencumbered software. The FSF calls Linux ("GNU/Linux") a "free" operating system but very significant organizations with lots of patent expertise in house pay royalties for their use of Linux: Amazon (which itself is a patent aggressor, so they know how to attack and will know how to defend themselves), Salesforce (that blowhard gave up about six weeks after a lawsuit was actually field), Samsung, HTC, TomTom, and who knows how many others. Far be it from me to like the idea of software patents and royalties that are paid on them, but if the FSF wants patent-unencumbered software, it has to use stuff that was open-sourced more than 20 years ago (and - very importantly - not changed since then):
      http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2010/07/richard-stallmans-mono-and-dotgnu.html
      FlorianMueller
      Reply Vote

  • RE: The deafening silence in the Oracle-Google lawsuit

    Even Java ME has been released under GPL (in PhoneME project).
    S P Arif Sahari Wibowo - http://www.arifsaha.com/
    Reply Vote

  • sun = brett favre of IP

    This really goes back to Sun's inability to decide whether to make Java a true open standard or protect it as intellectual property. Now that Sun has been absorbed into the Oracle Borg, it should become clear that Oracle wanted Sun for Java and intends to fight for it. That's not to say that the situation isn't complex, because there ARE unencumbered Java runtimes out there.
    GDF
    Reply Vote

    • RE: The deafening silence in the Oracle-Google lawsuit

      @GDF So is Tavaris Jackson now Mark Shuttleworth? (Football season coming.)
      DanaBlankenhorn
      Reply Vote

  • RE: The deafening silence in the Oracle-Google lawsuit

    [i]Could this be the anchor baby of open source advocacy?[/i]
    No way, it is about Larry's greed and lack of focus on the 2 evils: M$ & Apple.
    Linux Geek
    Reply Vote

  • RE: The deafening silence in the Oracle-Google lawsuit

    You know why you not hearing anything out of FSF etc. Its because Google took ALL the Linux changes out the main line Linux kernel. Android is open but it's not all that open. So why would the people you are keeping the sauce from choose to help you?
    tymiles
    Reply Vote

    • You may be right

      @tymiles Then they should say so.
      DanaBlankenhorn
      Reply Vote

      • RE: The deafening silence in the Oracle-Google lawsuit

        @DanaBlankenhorn

        They should? Why? They say what is most in their interest to say. That means a little 'soft shoe' for things they don't want broadcast too widely.

        But the question illustrates a more important aspect of the case: a lot of people have been commenting on the nature of the IP in Android without first coming to understand it clearly themselves.

        Unfortunately, this practice extends back much further in time than just this lawsuit. Remember all the confusion over which apps CyanogenMod could legally copy and which they could not? Remember all the recrimination against Google for defending their own IP?

        The same general class of confusion continues. So please, everyone, study the license types and IP issues before you add to the confusion.
        mejohnsn
        Reply Vote

    • Google's "openness" and its stance on software patents

      @tymiles It's true that most Android-based phones appear not to be truly open and Google's choice of the Apache Software License for Dalvik seems to be part of its strategy to allow partially closed/proprietary Android-based products.

      Also, Google is actually pro-software-patent. Google likes its own software patents (especially PageRank etc.) very much and just despises those of others (such as Oracle's patents).
      FlorianMueller
      Reply Vote

  • They're discussing it

    From talking to sources close to the organizations you mention, there seems to be a lot of discussion going on about how to respond to this, if at all. For example, there's a debate about whether the OIN patent license grants apply to Android or not, given that both Oracle and Google are licensees of OIN (but Sun wasn't). I expect to hear more in the days and weeks to come as the news on the suit is absorbed and the lawyers have a chance to thoroughly read over everything.
    Ed Burnette
    Reply Vote

    • RE: The deafening silence in the Oracle-Google lawsuit

      @Ed Burnette I agree that's likely. But the delay created a vacuum we all jumped into (more on that later).
      DanaBlankenhorn
      Reply Vote

    • The Sun-never-signed story is just a diversion

      @Ed Burnette I have now explained in detail on my blog why the question of Sun never having signed the OIN agreement is not only irrelevant (the problem is Dalvik isn't covered) but also a clear non-issue (the OIN license agreement pretty clearly constituted a license grant, and a retroactive license called a release, by Oracle to Google). I explained it all here:
      http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2010/08/open-invention-network-oin-oracle-vs.html
      FlorianMueller
      Reply Vote

    • The Sun-never-signed story is just a diversion

      @Ed Burnette I have now explained in detail on my blog why the question of Sun never having signed the OIN agreement is not only irrelevant (the problem is Dalvik isn't covered) but also a clear non-issue (the OIN license agreement pretty clearly constituted a license grant, and a retroactive license called a release, by Oracle to Google, including all of Sun's patents because Sun was acquired). I explained it all here:
      http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2010/08/open-invention-network-oin-oracle-vs.html
      FlorianMueller
      Reply Vote
CNET Join | Log In | Privacy | Cookies Close