141–150 of 345 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm pretty sure the Mono people are worried. These patents are things that are fairly fundamental and important to any sort of mobile device that has competent security.
No I'm pretty sure they aren't. The CLR is totally different to the JVM.
And no, the CLR is not totally different from the JVM.
I feel a little naive for not expecting something like this. I thought all the Sun/Oracle nonsense would be around MySQL.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So if I, as a company, release something as open source (licensing the patents[1] with no royalty to anyone who's interested, as long as they follow the rules in the license), then I, as the same company, can turn around and sue anyone who uses it for infringing those same patents? [1] I assume that when software covered by patents is released as open source, the patents are also implicitly granted as part of the lic…
You can probably sue somebody who uses different software that infringes your patents, which is what this lawsuit is about.
Interesting and relevant.
It just goes to show that whatever company-de-jour promises about enforcing the patents that they are granted today, all bets are off when they fall on hard times and are acquired tomorrow. Serious about openness? Skip the "patent and promise" dance and just release the damn thing BSD.
How would BSD help? It doesn't include a patent license.
I like this headline because if we sent it back in time 30 years it wouldn't make any sense at all.
Looking over the front page, I wonder what the people thirty years ago would have made of some of the other headlines: "Making GitHub More Open: Git-backed Wikis" "Twitter Polling in the Cloud in 30s using PiCloud" or, my favorite: "Burning man defeats PayPal" (I envision something like the Biblical story of Jesus driving money-changers out of a temple, but this time, Jesus lights himself on fire first. It's very int…
"Twitter Polling in the Cloud in 30s using PiCloud" wouldn't have made sense only 5 years ago.
Google's an engineering company and I think they should fight back as such. Get together a team of your best and brightest, take Postgres, and turn it into a drop-in replacement for Oracle. And be very public about your efforts.
More likely, they find a few dozen patents that they own that Oracle is infringing, and turn around and counter-sue.
Another one is that after all the denunciations and sabre-rattling, Google hand over a wad of cash to licence the technology and Oracle score a slice of Android sales.
Merely the threat of future lawsuits... justified or not, could harm Android adoption, so Google may settle (after posturing and sabre-rattling of course) on that basis alone
Google's an engineering company and I think they should fight back as such. Get together a team of your best and brightest, take Postgres, and turn it into a drop-in replacement for Oracle. And be very public about your efforts.
Because Oracle doesn't own any patents on the implementation of relational databases that they couldn't also sue Google over . . . The most engineer-ish thing to do is a back of the envelope calculation: 1. Estimate how much it'd cost to fight the suit. 2. Estimate the probability of winning. 3. Estimate the damages if you lose. 4. Estimate Oracle's ask for licensing the patents. If (1 + 2 * 3) < 4, fight, else settl…
My work has had bad experiences with Oracle license chenanigans. Of course Google probably has better lawyers than my work does!