

Oracle scrubs site of embarrassing Java blog - abraham
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-20082151-93/scoop-oracle-scrubs-site-of-embarrassing-java-blog/

======
glimcat
Congratulations, Oracle! Not only have you completely failed to eradicate that
information from the internet, but you've just made arguments to estoppel 10x
more effective.

~~~
Groxx
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect>

It's astonishing how many companies try it. I love the Internet for things
like this :)

~~~
tedunangst
I think the comparison to Streisand effect is way off. Oracle has not issued
any cease and desist letters to third parties. All they did was edit their own
website. Big whoop.

If a company's policy changes, they can't update their website to reflect the
new policy? Really, the internet is carved in stone?

~~~
rcxdude
the Streisand effect doesn't just apply to someone attempting to silence
another, It applies to any attempt to remove information (although it does
usually need to be information of some interest in order to apply).

------
PotatoChips
Not as interesting as this smoking gun from Andy Rubin.

This is pretty damning evidence of willful infringement on the part of Google.

One of the most interesting passages in today's order quotes from an October
2005 email by Google's Android boss Andy Rubin back in 2005:

"If Sun doesn't want to work with us, we have two options: 1) Abandon our work
and adopt MSFT CLR VM and C# language - or - 2) Do Java anyway and defend our
decision, perhaps making enemies along the way"

If a jury sees that statement (and if there is a trial, then the jury will see
it for sure), Google has a very serious problem. And "very serious" may be an
understatement. Moreover, a statement like that showing up in publicly
accessible court documents now may cause significant concern among many of
Google's Android partners (including, but not limited to, device makers).

[http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/07/judge-orders-
overhau...](http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/07/judge-orders-overhaul-of-
oracles.html)

~~~
haberman
Florian Mueller, is that you?

You copy/pasted this comment from your identical comment 14 hours ago, which
was rebutted and downvoted into oblivion:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2797179>

~~~
PotatoChips
what rebuttal? just a bunch of comments from people who are in denial of the
fact that Google willingly and knowingly infringed on Java patents when they
were developing Android.

Google already indicated that they are willing to pay and settle this thing
with Oracle.

~~~
shareme
ahem dude.. 99.9999% of all US patents suits are never brought to trial..it
was not settlement offer but a debate on stay two different things ..could not
MS find better mouthpieces?

~~~
rbanffy
> could not MS find better mouthpieces?

They need knowledgeable people with low moral standards. That's hard to find.

------
econgeeker
At one point in Android's development, Google was using Sun Java, and it is
not really embarrassing to see the CEO of Sun congratulating google on
becoming a customer. For whatever reasons, google later switched to their own
VM, etc.

It seems that people who think this is embarrassing to Oracle think that
Schwartz is talking about google's VM rather than the Sun one in this blog
post.

I think Oracle has been eradicating all signs of Previous Management of Sun
from the internet. Not because of the litigation with google but because Sun's
management was kinda embarrassing-- at least from the perspective of Oracle.

This post isn't actually damning because it reinforces the fact that Google
was a Sun customer, and thus had access to Sun IP, prior to doing their own
thing.

~~~
bad_user

          At one point in Android's development, Google was 
          using Sun Java
    

Android developers still use Oracle's Java in development mode -- only after
the code gets compiled for distribution it then gets translated to Dalvik's
bytecode.

But Dalvik was there from the start and if you're implying that somehow
Android used Sun's Java instead of the current Dalvik, then no, it never had.

