Practical Technology

for practical people.

August 16, 2010
by sjvn01
0 comments

Oracle vs. Google over Java

Oracle is suing Google over the use of Java in Android and that may change everything about Java and open-source development.

That’s one heck of a claim. Unfortunately, the experts agree.

Java, while never a key language in Linux, is the core language for literally hundreds of software development companies and organizations. They range in size from IBM with its J9 JVM (Java Virtual Machine) and Red Hat with its JBoss middleware stack to pure open-source projects such as the Apache/Jakarta, to individual developers who are members of the Java Community Process (JCP). It’s hard to think of a software development business that doesn’t use its own house-brew of Java somewhere in its product line or development stack.

Since, Oracle is an open-source company, complete with its own Linux distribution, the Red Hat-based Unbreakable Linux, you might be wondering why Oracle is doing this. James Gosling, Java’s creator, thinks it’s because Oracle wants money: “Oracle finally filed a patent lawsuit against Google. Not a big surprise. During the integration meetings between Sun and Oracle where we were being grilled about the patent situation between Sun and Google, we could see the Oracle lawyer’s eyes sparkle. Filing patent suits was never in Sun’s genetic code.”

Maybe it is though for Oracle. Certainly, Oracle has never been averse to going to the courtroom mats during its long history of hostile takeovers, such as its acquisition of PeopleSoft.

Oracle can go after Google because, while Java’s previous owner Sun, did open-source Java under the GPLv2, the Java specification patent grants that went along with it, are only valid if developers use fully-compliant Java implementation. Many, perhaps most, developers have used a variety of open-source Java implementations that aren’t fully compliant. This leaves them potentially vulnerable to hostile Oracle lawsuits.

Don’t think that Oracle isn’t aware of this. As Dan Kusnetzky, VP of Research Operations for The 451 Group, a prominent analyst firm, said, “This appears to be a warning shot across the bow of the whole industry. One could now question if Java will still be considered an open platform.”

John Weatherby, Jr., executive director of the Open Source Software Institute (OSSI), an organization that promotes the use of open-source software in government, agreed with Kusnetzky. Weatherby remarked, “I would assume this is an initial step by Oracle to start laying out a perimeter in their new sandbox and to let everyone know that they do, in fact, own the Sun assets. If you wished to send that message throughout the industry, what better target to smack than Google?”

Many observers were shocked by Oracle’s move. Jay Lyman, The 451 Group’s open-source analyst said, “This is a surprising move.” While Lyman expected that there was “a coming storm over software patents, I did not anticipate it would be initiated by Oracle.”

Lyman is hopeful that there will be a quick resolution. But, since “Oracle is a founding member of the Linux Foundation and Google is a member, I’m frankly surprised this was not settled within that consortium.”

Lyman’s unsure what Oracle really hopes to net from its lawsuit. “I’m not sure the gains are going to be worth the gamble here for Oracle. We may see the full weight of the pro-FOSS, anti-software patent movement come down on Oracle. I’ve already seen references to ‘SCOracle,’ which is a linkage to SCO Group and its failed legal efforts and not what any vendor initiating legal action would possibly want.”

Mark Webbink, Executive Director for the Center for Patent Innovations at New York Law School and former SVP at Red Hat, thinks the lawsuit is about the money. “I suspect this is about Oracle monetizing Java. Of course, when Larry Ellison’s ego is involved, who knows. If it is about monetizing Java, it will be the second biggest mistake made with Java. The first was Sun failing to open source it early on and capture that market. Instead, they left the door open for Microsoft.”

Andrew “Andy” Updegrove, a partner with Gesmer Updegrove LLP, a Boston law firm, and the editor of ConsortiumInfo.org the site for information about standards, thinks that “Clearly, Java was one of the Sun crown jewels, so the question was: ‘What to do with it?’ Since Sun would presumably be quite happy to license the patents to Google, that suggests that the motivation is monetary rather than strategic. Android has taken hold enough now that the Oracle suit won’t hold it back — which also means that if Oracle wins, its rewards could be substantial — and continue to become more so.”

He’s not the only one seeing dollar signs in Oracle’s eyes. Thomas Carey, a partner at the IP (intellectual property) law firm Sunstein Kann Murphy & Timbers LLP remarked that, “Google and its Android system make an irresistible target. If you could lay a claim to that revenue stream, you would.”

Carey added, “The Java developers license has for a long time contained terms that put developers on notice that commercial deployment of a product that includes Java requires the developer to make arrangements with Sun, including a royalty payment. Perhaps Google believes that it has come up with a non-infringing clone.”

Indeed, this is exactly what Google seems to have intended with its release of Dalvik, its JVM for Android. Dalvik’s path around Sun’s Java requirements was seen from its start as potentially being legally dodgy.”

Carey expects that “with two big companies with sophisticated appreciations of intellectual property, neither company is dead wrong on its position. Some confounding facts will come to light.”

Of course, the lawsuit may not just be about getting tons of cash. Updegrove observed, “There’s more than one way to recover on patent litigation. Could there be Google patents that Oracle would like to license at little or no cost, in exchange for a settlement? And Larry Ellison has never shied from poking someone in the eye if he thought that they were stepping on his turf.”

No matter what Oracle’s motive, is this really a smart move for the company? Stephen O’Grady, one of the founders of Red Monk, the developer-oriented analysis firm, said that “This is simply a case of Oracle being less concerned than Sun about being perceived as a bad actor. It is interesting, however, that Oracle appears to be willing to trade short-term transactional gains for long-term ecosystem health.”

Will Oracle win? It’s way too early to make any predictions, but this could be a long, nasty legal fight between two titans of the technology industry. That said, Oracle will face problems making its case.

As Kelly Talcott, a NY-based IP attorney, observed, “As for the patents, most of them are fairly long in the tooth as far as software patents go, which means they may not have been as diligently prosecuted by the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) as are current software patents. In any event, based on my very quick review of several of them, they appear to focus on fairly technical and discrete pieces of the system. Moving the case from the complaint stage to the claim construction stage alone (forget about trial) is thus going to be a lengthy, expensive process.”

In addition, Talcott pointed out that “Clearly Google is the biggest fish that Oracle could go after, with tremendous resources if it decides to fight back. I’d be a bit surprised if Oracle starts going after anybody else at this point. Usually if you go after multiple targets simultaneously you’ll pursue weaker defendants, using your greater size to your advantage. Oracle lacks that advantage here.”

Still, as Carey warned, “You can expect Oracle to move aggressively if it sees a commercially successful product that includes Java and which is not properly licensed.”

In short, if you’re in software development and you use Java in your work, you may not need to be too worried… yet. But, you certainly should be following this case like a hawk. It really does have the potential to transform the Java and open-source development landscape.


A version of Oracle vs. Google over Java first appeared in ITWorld.

August 16, 2010
by sjvn01
0 comments

Ubuntu Linux to go multi-touch

I spoke with Mark Shuttleworth, founder of Canonical, this morning, and he tells me that Canonical will be bringing true multi-touch to Ubuntu Linux in Ubuntu 10.10 (code name Maverick Meerkat).

“Multi-touch is just as useful on a desktop as it is on a phone or tablet, so I’m delighted that the first cut of Canonical’s UTouch framework has landed in Maverick and will be there for its release on 10.10.10. This is being driven in part because many partners want touch across their equipment range,” Shuttleworth said.

This doesn’t mean that Ubuntu is heading towards making a Linux for tablets ala Android or MeeGo. “We don’t have a tablet edition, but you could certainly use Ubuntu for tablet with this. Our focus is on the desktop and netbook,” he added.

In particular, Ubuntu’s programmers are developing for 4-finger touch devices. “While you can use one or a two-finger touch device, after our developer sprint last week, the absolute consensus was that 4-finger is the way to go. With 4-finger capable pads, such as Apple’s Magic Trackpad, you can use the full vocabulary of touch gestures,” Shuttleworth said.

More >

August 16, 2010
by sjvn01
0 comments

Oracle dumps OpenSolaris

Okay, I tried to resist, but I can’t help myself: I told you so.

I’ve said for over a year that with Oracle in charge, OpenSolaris would be toast. I had people tell me that I was just spreading FUD. Even after it became abundantly clear that Oracle was going to let it die off, I still had people swearing up and down that Oracle would keep OpenSolaris going.

It’s over. OpenSolaris is dead.

In a leaked Oracle internal memo to Solaris developers, Oracle management wrote, "We will not release any other binary distributions, such as nightly or bi-weekly builds of Solaris binaries, or an OpenSolaris 2010.05 or later distribution." As the OpenSolaris software engineer, Steven Stallion, wrote, "This concludes over four years of effort that I (and many other external contributors) have worked on the OpenSolaris project. This is a terrible send-off for countless hours of work — for quality software which will now ship as an Oracle product that we (the original authors) can no longer obtain on an unrestricted basis."

Stallion concluded, "I can only maintain that the software we worked on was for the betterment of all, not for any one company’s bottom line. This is truly a perversion of the open source spirit."

To which I can only reply, welcome to the Larry Ellison school of open-source thought. As I’d been trying to tell OpenSolaris developers all along, the god-king CEO of Oracle doesn’t give a damn about any open source that doesn’t directly benefit Oracle. The moment Oracle acquired Sun, OpenSolaris’ fate was sealed.

This is all of a piece with Oracle attacking Google’s open-source Android. Oracle couldn’t care less that it’s a partner with Google in the Linux Foundation. Oracle is all about Oracle winning and devil takes the hindmost.

Red Hat, whose Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) forms the basis for Oracle’s’ Unbreakable Linux, could tell you all about that. Oracle is no friend to other Linux companies or the Linux community. Unbreakable Linux’s real point is to break Red Hat. Why would anyone who actually looked at Oracle’s business history think it would take a different approach with Sun’s open-source projects that didn’t fit into Oracle’s plans?

That’s why I think almost all of Sun’s open-source programs are in deep trouble. Oracle has already cut the lifeline for projects that Sun had been friendly toward, specifically the open-source PostgreSQL DBMS. By the end of the year, I suspect we can start writing open-source MySQL DBMS’s obituary. Other old Sun open-source projects will start getting their official pink slips around October.

Why October? Because that’s when Oracle can claim the projects aren’t profitable, and it’ll be long enough after Oracle acquired Sun to avoid any troublesome merger and acquisition legal questions. I believe Oracle always intended to let most, if not all, of Sun’s open-source portfolio die. I’m now surer of this than ever.

OpenSolaris itself may live on. The Illumos open-source project, founded by former Sun developers, is seeking to keep OpenSolaris going.

Evan Powell, CEO of Nexenta, the company behind Illumos, wrote, "We’ve been planning for this contingency for a long time. We have the team to continue to support customers and partners and to continue our development. We look forward to picking up the appropriate pieces of Solaris when they are made available with Solaris 11 as well."

This won’t be easy. But enough of Sun’s top Solaris engineers have left Oracle for greener pastures that creating a truly open OpenSolaris is possible. Whether they can do this without having Oracle attack them, well, as Google and Red Hat can tell you, that’s another question.


A version of this story first appeared in ComputerWorld.

August 13, 2010
by sjvn01
0 comments

Oracle vs. Google over Java in Android is only the start.

I don’t think Oracle suing Google over the use of Java in Android has much to do with Android at all. I think it has everything to do with Oracle monetizing Java anyway it can. That spells big trouble for any company or developer who uses Java but hasn’t obeyed the letter of Java’s intellectual property laws. I’m looking at you, Red Hat/JBoss; Apache/Jakarta; and members of the JCP (Java Community Process). Get ready. Legal trouble is coming your way.

I am not a lawyer, but I don’t think you need to be one to figure out why Oracle is doing this. Java and all its associated technologies are very valuable. Sun was never able to squeeze much money out of Java’s IP (intellectual property). Sun preferred to make its money by building programs around Java.

Let’s let James Gosling, Java’s creator, tell you his take on how he saw Oracle thinking about making money from Java: "Oracle finally filed a patent lawsuit against Google. Not a big surprise. During the integration meetings between Sun and Oracle where we were being grilled about the patent situation between Sun and Google, we could see the Oracle lawyer’s eyes sparkle. Filing patent suits was never in Sun’s genetic code."

Why pick on Google first? Well, to quote some of my more cynical lawyer friends, you always sue whoever has the deepest pockets first. As Willie Sutton put it when asked why he robs banks, "Because that’s where the money is."

Keep in mind that Oracle is headed by Larry Ellison, the dog-fighting pit-bull of technology CEOs. He’ll take on any company at any time if he feels there’s a chance that he can win. And Larry doesn’t lose very often, as those of us who follow Oracle know so well.

If Oracle goes after other companies that use their own house-brewed Java, these businesses will be in for a world of hurt. Most of them can’t afford lawsuits that may cost millions and last years. The whole secret of winning any lawsuit is being able to outspend and outlast your opposition. Few businesses have the resources fo fight a company the size of Oracle. Any resemblance between this strategy and that of many successful Survivor villains is not a coincidence.

I don’t how this is going to work out. I do know that it has every potential to be a defining moment not just for Android or Java, but for open source in general. When I broke the story in November 2006 that Sun was open-sourcing Java under the GPLv2, I didn’t notice that the Java specification patent grant that went along with it, and which came out in December 2006, is only valid if developers use fully compliant Java implementation. Oops.

If I were Google or any other company that has shipped Java spins-offs, I’d be worried. I have a sinking feeling that patent cases, such as this one, are going to be far more troublesome for Linux and open source than any of the bogus SCO copyright claims were.

As Eben Moglen, director of the Software Freedom Law Center, said at LinuxCon, the day before the Oracle lawsuit hit the fan, "Clarity in software patents isn’t coming any time soon," and "Large number of organizations with patents are still hostile to the GPL."

Who knew that Oracle, which has been an open-source supporter, would turn this nasty towards other open-source companies? Well, from what Gosling has said, Oracle did. This does not bode well for free and open-source software.

A version of this story first appeared in ComputerWorld.

August 11, 2010
by sjvn01
0 comments

Novell takes SUSE Linux to the cloud with Amazon

BOSTON, Mass. — Novell was to have announced at LinuxCon that users will be able to run their own customized instances of SUSE Linux Enterprise Server (SLES) 10 and 11 on the Amazon Web Services (AWS) cloud. While the announcement was pulled at the last minute, I’m told that the marriage of SLES and AWS is going ahead.

Markus Rex, Novell’s SVP and General Manager of Open Platform Solutions, told me prior to the formal announcement that users will be able to create their own special SLES blend with SUSE Studio and then upload and use it on AWS. Once it’s there, you can pay Amazon to take care of all its updates, patches, and support. Or, if you’d rather, you can pay Amazon for a generic ready-to-run SLES server on the cloud. They’ll be happy to ‘sell’ you one.

This new offering will be available around the world, and you can pay for using it on an hourly basis. Essentially what Novell is doing here is making AWS a SLES reseller. In the background, Novell will be doing the heavy-lifting on support, but business users will have only one throat to choke if there are any problems: AWS.

More >

August 10, 2010
by sjvn01
0 comments

Linux Foundation launches major open-source license compliance program

BOSTON, Mass. — The Linux Foundation, the non-profit organization dedicated to supporting Linux, announced on Aug. 10 at LinuxCon the launch of the Open Compliance Program, a comprehensive initiative to help companies and developers comply with open-source licenses.

You may not know it, but getting businesses and developers to obey open-source licenses has become a much bigger problem over the years. I’m not talking about the differences between GPLv2 and GPLv3. I’m talking about companies using open-source code and not realizing that they can’t just use it any way they want.

This has become a problem because almost every major company is now using Linux and open-source software. That’s both the good and bad news. With so many companies using and, more important, incorporating free and open-source software (FOSS) in their products, there’s lots of room for businesses to make big mistakes.

That’s especially true in the mobile and consumer electronics space. All you have to do is look at the legal record and you can see that. Company after company builds some neat device and uses FOSS but then doesn’t bother to follow the rules on how the software should be used. Then, when they’re caught at it, the Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC) or a private law firm comes down like a ton of bricks on the open-source license violators, and they have to pay for their sins.

More >