Comments on: Android Code Copying Evidence from Florian Meuller Found Weightless

By: carnegie0107

carnegie0107 — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 19:06:51 +0000

Ugh. So many comments saying Google still copied, whether it was shipped with Android or not. Fact is, though, these files were originally distributed by Sun for developers to use exactly the way Google used them–for development and testing. They just accidentally uploaded them to a server in a place where it looks like it is a part of the finished product. But they’re not. Also, from my understanding, the files that were accidentally mislabeled with an Apache license were actually GPL’d code? If that’s the case, Oracle has no case, but OHA did mess up by breaking the GPL. Nevertheless, by deleting those files, they have fixed their mistake, and in any case the extent of the legal action that can be taken against someone for misusing GPL code is to order them to release any resulting code under the GPL. But there is no resulting code! Those files are never compiled.

The point is, OHA copied nothing. Those files were free to use the way they were being used, though their presence on that particular server was pointless.

By: coolfunnytshirts.net

coolfunnytshirts.net — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 17:41:14 +0000

sold or not, they were copied, i guess…

By: Trampoleene

Trampoleene — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 13:55:21 +0000

Well, first of all, I think there is a case. Even if files uploaded used and re-licensed by mistake, they were still distributed (although not with any end-product) and, of course, Google is liable for that.
But it is a copyright case. Probably even just a minor one. What struck me as odd from the beginning, were all the posts claiming that this had an impact on the the patent lawsuit Oracle is leading against Google. I don’t see the connection. Copyright is not a patent and files aren’t either.
Of course Oracle would not be interested in stressing the copyright case, simply because there is not a lot of money in it.

By: Jude Smith

Jude Smith — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 12:50:12 +0000

And do you, my dear Legal Genius, have some particular divine insight into Android’s openness that us lesser mortals are not privy to?

By: UnderDoc

UnderDoc — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 09:19:17 +0000

Let’s assume Google used the files in breach of the license. So what, they go and stay in the corner? Get real, if the files aren’t part of Android, then the OS isn’t affected in any way. Who cares if Google or OHA need to pay something to settle for the indiscretion, not me anyway…

I wonder why so many posts in no time jumping on Google… What do you have to win? Really?

Google losing a suit from Oracle isn’t going to stop AAPL from falling, you know…

By: pepe

pepe — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 09:07:10 +0000

Wow, interesting.

Collecting patents for counter-suits is a standard practice for several years now. I wonder if that was the explicit goal when forming this alliance? I mean, if Android is freely distributed, what reasons are there for forming such an alliance?

By: NotALawyer

NotALawyer — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 07:40:27 +0000

On a side note, I wonder if Apple was aware of the fact, that when they sued HTC, they were also including the likes of?

Acer
Alcatel
Asus
CCI
DELL
FIH (Foxconn which builds Apple equipment)
Garmin
Haier
Huwei
Kyocera
Lenovo
LG
Nec
Samsung
Sharp
Sony-Ericsson
Toshiba
ZTE

which individually maybe easy picking, though their combined portfolio is impressive.

If these companies along with:

Mobile Operators
Semiconductor Companies
Software Companies
Commercialization Companies

That are part of OHA cross license each other. There are very few companies (including Apple and Oracle) that could stand a chance against them.

By: NotALawyer

NotALawyer — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 07:28:11 +0000

The files in question where in the past Authorized and Promoted by Sun for testing purposes (the way Android used them).

If the licensing was done in such a way in the past. Its use is not harmful, as the original author granted this. Now things changed when Oracle decided to sue.

This is a muddled case at best, IP lawyers will have a feast. But it resembles a lot with what was done with SCO, and eventually lead to SCO’s demise.

This is a costly IP battle that will hit Oracle much more than OHA. Yes, Oracle is suing Google, though the owner of Android adoption is OHA which is something most people miss.

OHA clearly states…

Welcome to the Open Handset Alliance™, a group of 79 technology and mobile companies who have come together to accelerate innovation in mobile and offer consumers a richer, less expensive, and better mobile experience. Together we have developed Android™, the first complete, open, and free mobile platform

….

Together these 79 companies have a huge Patent portfolio which is hard to fight. Google was smart and wise using OHA for Android delivery and not its self.

By: tandes04

tandes04 — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 05:14:06 +0000

Yep. As others have pointed out the znet article just makes it clear that someone else is playing armchair lawyer. Contrary to what everyone might “know” it doesn’t matter if the code in question is found in shipped handsets or not. It still appears that Google violated the elua for the code. If they operated outside of the licensing agreement they’re in violation of some one else’s IP.

By: goo

goo — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 04:49:03 +0000

Don’t Be Evil

By: gayu

gayu — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 03:33:32 +0000

Use of code in development of an application or OS without permission even if the original code is not present in the shipping product is illegal. If Oracle proves that the code actually helped in development of the OS. Google should solve this problem before it becomes a liability for handset manufacturers.

By: JD

JD — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 02:57:34 +0000

As others said, the technical aspects might not hold water, but its what was discovered that will actually provide backing to Oracle.

Google copied anyway, lets just admit it.

P.S. Android is also not open, sorry to make anyone cry over that truth either.

By: rmills

rmills — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 02:39:37 +0000

While they may no longer still be using the code that was discovered, the fact that they tampered with the licenses COULD have legal ramifications. Also, just because they didn’t use the files, if any of them were not licensed to be released outside of Oracle/Sun it’s still a legal issue.