Oops: No copied Java code or weapons of mass destruction found in Andr

[ViperAFK]

Source:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/burnette/oops-no-copied-java-code-or-weapons-of-mass-destruction-found-in-android/2162

Sometimes the sheer wrongness of what is posted on the web leaves us speechless. Especially when it’s picked up and repeated as gospel by otherwise reputable sites like Engadget. “Google copied Oracle’s Java code, pasted in a new license, and shipped it,” they reported this morning.

Sorry, but that just isn’t true.

It all started with an article written by Florian Mueller, who by the way is neither a lawyer nor a developer although he plays one on TV. I downloaded and examined all the files he wrote about, and my analysis as an expert developer comes to a completely different conclusion than Mr. Mueller. Here’s what I found:

There are two sets of files in question. The first set of 7 (PolicyNodeImpl.java, AclEntryImpl.java, AclImpl.java, GroupImpl.java, OwnerImpl.java, PermissionImpl.java, and PrincipalImpl.java) are in the unit test area of the source code tree. As any programmer will tell you, you don’t ship your unit tests with your product. Unit tests are tools used internally to ensure the quality of the software before you ship it.

The second set of 37 files is actually zipped up into one file called MMAPI.zip and tucked away in a directory used for native code audio drivers for one particular type of chip set. Florian really had to go digging for this one. I double-checked the make files and it’s clear this file is not shipped with Android either. Somebody uploaded it by mistake and it should simply be deleted.

I did find one odd thing about the first 7 files. Sun published those files on its web site to help developers debug and test their own code. For some reason, the Android or Harmony developer who was using them decompiled and rebuilt them instead of just using the ones from Sun. Later an Apache license got incorrectly pasted to the top of the files, perhaps by some automated script. The solution to this earth shattering conspiracy? Replace them with the original files from Sun which have the correct comments. Or just delete them. After all, they’re not shipped with Android.

Updated: Looks like Google has already taken care of these files. PolicyNodeImpl.java was deleted from the source tree on 30 Oct 2010. The other 6 java files and a few others were deleted on 14 Jan 2011. The commit comment from developer Dan Bornstein reads “Remove pointless tests”. You can still go back through the history to see the old versions.

Sadly, while sensational articles like Engadget’s and Mueller’s will get splashed all over the web and lavished with thousands of views and hundreds of comments, the boring truth will rate no such attention.

[shiny_red_cobra]

lol moron looking for his 15 minutes of fame

[ViperAFK]

Yeah I had doubts as soon as I read the original engadget article alledging the infringement, I was like seriously? There's no way google would be so incredibly stupid to directly copy java code like that and include it in android, especially considering they are alright having legal troubles with oracle.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

The comments are interesting since the guy who made the claims originally is responding and attacking people.

From the comments I skimmed, I don't think he knows what unit tests are :laugh:

[guru]

atest from engadget

So it's been a fun day of armchair code forensics and legal analysis on the web after Florian Mueller published a piece this morning alleging Google directly copied somewhere between 37 and 44 Java source files in Android. That's of course a major accusation, seeing as Oracle is currently suing Google for patent and copyright infringement related to Java, and it prompted some extremely harsh technical rebuttals, like this one from ZDNet and this one from Ars Technica. The objections in short: the files in question are test files, aren't important, probably don't ship with Android, and everyone is making a hullabaloo over nothing.

We'll just say this straight out: from a technical perspective, these objections are completely valid. The files in question do appear to be test files, some of them were removed, and there's simply no way of knowing if any of them ended up in a shipping Android handset. But -- and this is a big but -- that's just the technical story. From a legal perspective, it seems very likely that these files create increased copyright liability for Google, because the state of our current copyright law doesn't make exceptions for how source code trees work, or whether or not a script pasted in a different license, or whether these files made it into handsets. The single most relevant legal question is whether or not copying and distributing these files was authorized by Oracle, and the answer clearly appears to be "nope" -- even if Oracle licensed the code under the GPL. Why? Because somewhere along the line, Google took Oracle's code, replaced the GPL language with the incompatible Apache Open Source License, and distributed the code under that license publicly. That's all it takes -- if Google violated the GPL by changing the license, it also infringed Oracle's underlying copyright. It doesn't matter if a Google employee, a script, a robot, or Eric Schmidt's cat made the change -- once you've created or distributed an unauthorized copy, you're liable for infringement.*

Why does this matter? Because we're hearing that Oracle is dead-set on winning this case and eventually extracting a per-handset royalty on every Android handset shipped. In that context, "those files aren't important!" isn't a winning or persuasive argument -- and the more these little infringements add up, the worse things look for Google. Whether or not these files are a "smoking gun" isn't the issue -- it's whether Android infringes Oracle's patents and copyrights, since the consequences either way will be monumental and far-reaching. Ultimately, though, the only person who can resolve all of this for certain is a judge -- and it's going to take a lot more time and research to get there.

--

*They're not directly comparable, but think about the Psystar case for a second. Even though Psystar desperately wanted to argue that Apple's OS X license agreement was invalid, the judge never got there -- he simply ruled Psystar wasn't authorized to copy and distribute OS X, and swung the hammer. It really is that simple sometimes.

source: http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/21/android-source-code-java-and-copyright-infringement-whats-go/

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

Engadget keeps saying Google is the one doing it, but these files were with the Apache Harmony project to start with before Google imported it into their tree (which is normal if you're developing on it or using it)

[Buio]

Sadly, while sensational articles like Engadget?s and Mueller?s will get splashed all over the web and lavished with thousands of views and hundreds of comments, the boring truth will rate no such attention.

Indeed true.

[Quillz]

Regardless of whether or not Android actually has copied Java files, it's not like anything is going to happen with it. There would be a monetary settlement and that would be that.

[+LogicalApex MVC]

Well Oracle is suing Google so they think there is a case. The courts will determine what is fact and fiction though...

[tiagosilva29]

From the comments I skimmed, I don't think he knows what unit tests are :laugh:

Nobody knows what unit testing is.

The courts will determine what is fact and fiction though...

In law, 2 plus 2 may return 3 or 5. Sometimes it is 4.

[+LogicalApex MVC]

In law, 2 plus 2 may return 3 or 5. Sometimes it is 4.

Of course there are fallacies and imperfections that prevent the legal system from being perfect, but they will be shown a lot more of both sides of the argument than any of us will. That will allow them to sift through the details in search of the facts in a far better manner than any of us.

[evo_spook]

Engadget keeps saying Google is the one doing it, but these files were with the Apache Harmony project to start with before Google imported it into their tree (which is normal if you're developing on it or using it)

Wrong, I've read they were not.

[Growled Member]

In other words, no one can say for sure if Google copied the code or not.

[guru]

Updated: Looks like Google has already taken care of these files. PolicyNodeImpl.java was deleted from the source tree on 30 Oct 2010. The other 6 java files and a few others were deleted on 14 Jan 2011. The commit comment from developer Dan Bornstein reads ?Remove pointless tests?. You can still go back through the history to see the old versions.

Source:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/burnette/oops-no-copied-java-code-or-weapons-of-mass-destruction-found-in-android/2162

Oracle sues Google over Android

NEW YORK | Fri Aug 13, 2010 2:23am EDT

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE67B5G720100813

i wonder if those deletions themselves could be considered destruction of evidence considering they happened after Oracle sued.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

The files didn't go anywhere, they're still kept in the revision history.

And when destroying evidence, it's not a good idea to write down the details in a public location. :laugh: