Hacker News Reader

Comment by jsiepkes | Hacker News Reader

Your suggesting .net as an alternative but ironically the licensing of Java is largely shaped due to the Sun vs Microsoft lawsuit. Microsoft tried to do their famous Embrace, Extend, extinguish on Java (and failed: https://www.cnet.com/news/sun-microsoft-settle-java-suit/ ).

Its only been a couple of years that Microsoft has been behaving "better". I suggest you read up on the history of Java, Android, Google and Microsoft because you also seem to be unaware what Android Oracle vs Google was really about; Its wasn't about patents, it was about copyright.

You know what they say about history: Those who don't know it are doomed to repeat it.

View on HN

>Its only been a couple of years that Microsoft has been behaving "better"

So? Oracle has never behaved good, so there's that. Do you expect a MS regression?

Besides MS has made some concrete efforts to clear things, like a pledge to not sue over patents, an ECMA standard, etc.

>I suggest you read up on the history of Java, Android, Google and Microsoft because you also seem to be unaware what Android Oracle vs Google was really about; Its wasn't about patents, it was about copyright.

Same difference if Oracle ends up suing you for recreating Java APIs.

Microsoft's pledge not to sue [1] covers only compliant implementations of specific versions of some of the components. Since Android, for example, could be considered non-compliant (with the Java specification), they wouldn't necessarily have been covered if they had based it in the same way on .NET instead. Even if they were, there would likely still have been issues with the parts that aren't listed as covered by the pledge.

On top of that, while the promise mentions "Microsoft-owned or Microsoft-controlled patents" it is very specific about who is promising not to sue - Microsoft only, not its partners, subsidiaries or other affiliated entities. So they still have plenty of room to arrange for opponents to be sued.

[1] https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecifications/dn646765

> Same difference if Oracle ends up suing you for recreating Java APIs.

Not at all. In a copyright case, you can argue fair use, as Google did.

If you're arguing fair user, you've already lost. That's a matter of opinion so it has to go all the way to a jury verdict. That means there's no guarantee and even if you win, you have to pay a couple million for the billable hours. You want a defense that's so obvious, the judge will throw out any case against you on the first day.

It should be so obvious that no one would even attempt to file the case

Yeah, but how about not there being a case, and not having to argue (and pay laywers and such) at all?

What is your suggestion, then, if Java and .net are off the table?

I never said they were off the table. I'm saying it makes no sense to replace Java with .net based on the reasons provided.

Comparing evils is always hard. Oracle is definitely not my favourite company. However today this was posted about Microsoft: https://www.ghacks.net/2018/09/12/microsoft-intercepting-fir...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com