[ordiel]

If source its not subjet to corpyright then independently of it being illegaly leaked, i could unbrand XP's source code (that as I recall was leaked no long back) use it and redistribute it even for profit... I would like to see M$ answer to that.

I think the issue with Java's API was actually terribly explained even by Oracle's lawyers, Google stole that API, first because it already had a large amount of developers familiar with it so they could benefit of cheap code monkeys developing for their platform, added modifications (memory management) which under Java's open source licence (Oracle owns java yet it is still open source) they should have made public for everyone's benefit (in a true Open Source spirit), modified the packaging mechanism (slightly, you know .apk), so instead of you know having a package (jar) that can run on a desktop or rather on any JVM it could only run on the devices with their* OS (or rather dalvik implementation) and guess what, now that there are some options to run those on other environments the "casually" decided to change it again instead of letting people benefit from the rich APK ecosystem somewhere else than Android

[UncleEntity]

> I think the issue with Java's API was actually terribly explained even by Oracle's lawyers…

Of which none of your examples are in any way applicable to the case of google violating the Java copyright.

The Java Specification gives terms and conditions for usage which is what the lawsuit was about and not some laundry list of things which annoys a random internet person. In fact, not annoying your users isn’t even mentioned once in the conditions to call an implementation “Java” strangely enough.

Or I’m completely wrong and oracle doesn’t spend enough on their legal team.