WingNews logo WingNews GitHub [2]
top | item 2806771

Sun CEO explicitly endorsed Java's use in Android

105 points| mrsebastian | 14 years ago |zdnet.com | reply

33 comments

order
[+] mseebach|14 years ago|reply
I think it's a weak argument, actually I think it's a slippery slope if CEOs can't say anything without that implicitly granting all sorts of permissions. It's a valid defense that Schwartz obviously meant to welcome Android to being based on Java, assuming they didn't infringe on Suns intellectual property.

"I'm happy people is so excited about watching our movies" is not an endorsement of pirating said movie.

[+] ansy|14 years ago|reply
I am not a lawyer, but I completely disagree when estoppel is taken into consideration[1]. Sun publicly endorsed Google's implementation of Java and there is probably plenty of evidence it endorsed it privately as well.

There is a reason a CEO doesn't just spout off whatever he wants without consulting a lawyer. Especially on company letterhead which is what the Sun Blog amounts to these days. If it was a mistake it should have been retracted. But it wasn't, so maybe it wasn't a mistake in the eyes of the law.

And yes, if a film's rights holder gives explicit or even implicit endorsement of people watching the film through piracy, as did Michael Moore [2], that does protect you from him suing you for pirating it. You don't need a license contract to tell you it's OK.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estoppel

[2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7uvRCyVfa0

[+] Symmetry|14 years ago|reply
The crucial difference between this situation and the one that Google is in is that the activity the Sun CEO refered to was the allegedly infringing activity. "I'm happy people are watching our movies" wouldn't be a cause for invoking estoppel, but "I'm happy people are bittorrenting our movies" would be.

Also, in this case the crucial aspect is what the law is, not the quickly considered opinions of non-lawyers like us.

[+] eli|14 years ago|reply
"Now, I am not a lawyer, but [...]. Hopefully, the U.S. District Court will see it the same way and throw this case into the trash heap where it belongs."

Maybe I'm just a journalism snob, but that's some pretty poor reporting.

[+] Symmetry|14 years ago|reply
Reading the Wikipedia page on estoppel[1], it seems that Google's case is strengthened much more by Sun's long delay in pursuing legal action against Google than by a casual statement by the CEO. Of course, IANAL.

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estoppel

[+] m_eiman|14 years ago|reply
Except he congratulates them on using Java, not dalvik. The assumption being that Google would not circumvent the conditions for using Sun's Java tech/IP, naturally.
[+] nextparadigms|14 years ago|reply
Dalvik was already launched by the time of the post. So clearly he implied the Java inside Dalvik.
[+] chalst|14 years ago|reply
Right. It does make the $6 billion damages claim that much harder to swallow, though.
[+] nl|14 years ago|reply
IMHO, this is a much stronger case:

Nothing in the licensing terms will prevent open source projects from creating and distributing their own compatible open source implementations of Java SE 6, using standard open source licenses

From JSR-270

http://www.jroller.com/scolebourne/entry/jcp_bonn_meeting_oc...

[+] wmf|14 years ago|reply
That doesn't help because Dalvik is not compatible (and to make it compatible would probably require making it too slow and bloated to run on phones).
[+] nl|14 years ago|reply
This article seems to try and make a link between the fact that the blog post is no longer available, and the Google/Oracle court case.

That isn't how it happened - Oracle took down the old Sun blogging site (along with all the blogs) at the same time. It was a typical Oracle move - wanting to control the dialog about their platform - but I don't think it was specifically about this case.

[+] erikb|14 years ago|reply
I think we people, who are using and depending on Java and Android shouldn't take these lawsuits too personal. It is just one point where the Oracle army (made of lawyers) found a possible hole in the defense of Google and tries to attack it. Who wins this battle doesn't actually concerns our lives at all (excluding the CEOs of Oracle and Google, of course).
[+] CaptainZapp|14 years ago|reply
This is extremely optimistic and advocates a total head-in-the-sand view (except ostriches don't really do that).

Companies seem to care very little if their little patent wars leave a little or a lot collateral damage.

GIF, anybody?