[toyg]

Guess who did the same thing? Sun and Oracle. Did Sun steal Java too?

A general point: Sun (Oracle is another matter, but we can safely assume they won't prosecute themselves) could "steal" Java as much as they wanted, because you cannot infringe your own copyright. Copyright doesn't forbid actions per se (i.e. "any copying") but it does forbid specific individuals from performing those actions (i.e. unauthorized third-parties). So, assuming the JVM was subject to copyright or patents (which is more or less what they're debating in court at the moment), Sun employees could have reimplemented it a million times, either privately or publicly, but this would not have granted anyone else the right to do the same.

Besides, your statement that "at no point did [Google] claim that Android was Java" is debatable -- most developers approach Android with the belief that "it's basically Java with some peculiarities", and this was a large factor in its successful efforts to recruit independent developers. Whether this "implying" was lawful or not, it's for the tribunal to decide.

[foamdino]

Just because I believe something is so (Andriod == Java) doesn't make it so.

Google do not claim (as far as I've seen anywhere) that Android is Java. They must name the APIs java.x to ensure source compatibility, but they chuck the class file format and the dalvik vm is certainly not a jvm.

[toyg]

The compatibility efforts on the API are exactly what the trial is currently about. Oracle says they violate their IP rights; Google says they don't. We'll see how it goes.