Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckieTigger
That is what happened? How is that possible or even legal. If Google used a version of Java that was under a GNU license, then copyright should not even come into question. As far as I understand, the GNU license allows to break copyright in the one case where the modified software also have a GNU license. |
That's the time line. GNU does have a licensing fee associated with it but it's rarely invoked. Google had an opportunity to license with Sun, but opted to go with a clean room implementation instead. Sun opted not to go after Google. So there is a certain level of ambiguity there and Google did leave themselves open.
Google's big mistake was to assume that Sun's benevolent control of Java was going to continue. There was a lot of concern in the programming world when Oracle bought Sun, then sued Google. Several other languages such as Ruby, started to gain in popularity about that time. Heck, I think that Google even came out with a programming language.
Also there are a couple of patents involved, but I think the major issue is the idea that API's can be copyrighted. The original ruling was that they could not be, but that was overturned on appeal. Saying API's can be copyrighted is a bit like saying titles can be copyrighted.