Unsurprising but noteworthy: Oracle wins on appeal against Google.
I was admittedly frustrated at the outcome of the original trial. It was basically ruled that API's aren't creative based on a "form follows function" argument. And the example used was a totally flawed, provably wrong concept about how an API to draw a circle could only be written one way.
Not that anyone one should really care about this. Except perhaps Google and Oracle. While I totally agree API's should be copyrightable, I don't feel that either way would it have a substantial impact on most peoples day to day. Very few libraries are widely adopted enough that someone else could benefit tangibly from wholesale copying of API's. Also, you are about as likely to unknowingly reproduce a sufficient enough chunk of someone else's API as you are to unknowingly reproduce a sufficient amount of someone else's short story or other artistic work.
How we got here was; Someone realized that the appeal of hardware was waning and that apps were slowly becoming the new product mover in the mobile sphere. This meant that they needed to attract developers to their platform. Putting out a totally new language with its own totally unique API's would have been off-putting and a huge gamble.
Which to most would seem to leave only one option. Leverage an existing programming language. Java was great. It had a huge developer base, it was free for both developers and platform owners, it was already used by the then market leader, BlackBerry. And all it required was a JVM that could interpret Java code in a fashion compliant with other JVM's as determined by Oracle's (then Sun's) test suite.
The problem was, for whatever reasons, Google decided Java was insufficient. And since the first option of a whole new language likely would have killed Android before it ever got off the ground. So they invented a 3rd option. Copy the requisite Java API's and build their own non-compliant VM (Dalvik).
I think my view on this case is well established at this point. So I won't bring it up again here.
Frankly, I also don't think Google is at all surprised by the outcome either. Recently they released, effectively a new runtime for Android that eliminates Dalvik. In fact it switches from being a JIT compiled language to being a fully compiled language. I suspect this was a first step in ensuring they could avoid future damages as a result of this. If they developed a tool which would convert existing Android code into the new precompiled binaries that would fall under a fair-use type scenario... then developers could theoretically continue to develop using the "old" Java based API's as long as they wanted. All direct references to those API's, including the Dalvik VM could be ripped out of Android.
At some point Google may need to develop their own language, but they are now in absolute control of the market... so the fears they faced in the beginning over adoption of the new tool are long gone. In the meantime, no one would absolutely need to stop using the old approach.
Honestly, I don't see a way from this in which Oracle can win enough damages to undo or to make up for the impact Android had on Java. So even if Google suffers massive damages claims and is forced to abandon Java... I don't think it will take sufficient steam out of either Google or Android.
The sad part? I hate Android development as it stands today. If Google drops the Java API's, "goes legit", and comes up with their own SDK based on their own language... I think I'm actually more likely to join that camp of developers than I am today.
Not that anyone one should really care about this. Except perhaps Google and Oracle. While I totally agree API's should be copyrightable, I don't feel that either way would it have a substantial impact on most peoples day to day. Very few libraries are widely adopted enough that someone else could benefit tangibly from wholesale copying of API's. Also, you are about as likely to unknowingly reproduce a sufficient enough chunk of someone else's API as you are to unknowingly reproduce a sufficient amount of someone else's short story or other artistic work.
How we got here was; Someone realized that the appeal of hardware was waning and that apps were slowly becoming the new product mover in the mobile sphere. This meant that they needed to attract developers to their platform. Putting out a totally new language with its own totally unique API's would have been off-putting and a huge gamble.
Which to most would seem to leave only one option. Leverage an existing programming language. Java was great. It had a huge developer base, it was free for both developers and platform owners, it was already used by the then market leader, BlackBerry. And all it required was a JVM that could interpret Java code in a fashion compliant with other JVM's as determined by Oracle's (then Sun's) test suite.
The problem was, for whatever reasons, Google decided Java was insufficient. And since the first option of a whole new language likely would have killed Android before it ever got off the ground. So they invented a 3rd option. Copy the requisite Java API's and build their own non-compliant VM (Dalvik).
I think my view on this case is well established at this point. So I won't bring it up again here.
Frankly, I also don't think Google is at all surprised by the outcome either. Recently they released, effectively a new runtime for Android that eliminates Dalvik. In fact it switches from being a JIT compiled language to being a fully compiled language. I suspect this was a first step in ensuring they could avoid future damages as a result of this. If they developed a tool which would convert existing Android code into the new precompiled binaries that would fall under a fair-use type scenario... then developers could theoretically continue to develop using the "old" Java based API's as long as they wanted. All direct references to those API's, including the Dalvik VM could be ripped out of Android.
At some point Google may need to develop their own language, but they are now in absolute control of the market... so the fears they faced in the beginning over adoption of the new tool are long gone. In the meantime, no one would absolutely need to stop using the old approach.
Honestly, I don't see a way from this in which Oracle can win enough damages to undo or to make up for the impact Android had on Java. So even if Google suffers massive damages claims and is forced to abandon Java... I don't think it will take sufficient steam out of either Google or Android.
The sad part? I hate Android development as it stands today. If Google drops the Java API's, "goes legit", and comes up with their own SDK based on their own language... I think I'm actually more likely to join that camp of developers than I am today.
Comments
Post a Comment