You're right, of course, Alan but perhaps this lawsuit will test that very principle? <br><br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 13 August 2010 11:34, Alan Pope <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:alan@popey.com">alan@popey.com</a>></span> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="im">On 13 August 2010 11:27, Bruce Beardall <<a href="mailto:bruce72@gmail.com">bruce72@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br> > For those who don't already know, Oracle has decided to sue Google for using<br> > Java, somehow missing the whole "Java is Open Source" idea. Is this what<br> > Oracle had in mind when buying Sun? An IP cash cow?<br> ><br> <br> </div>Just because Java is (now) under a free-er license doesn't negate the<br> patents that have been built up over the years by Sun and are now<br> owned by Oracle.<br> <br> Very sad.<br> <br> Cheers,<br> Al.<br> <div><div></div><div class="h5"><br> --<br> <a href="mailto:ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com">ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com</a><br> <a href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk" target="_blank">https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk</a><br> <a href="https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/" target="_blank">https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/</a><br> </div></div></blockquote></div><br>