Java Software

A while back ago Sun Microsystems settled a lawsuit with Microsoft, where Microsoft was using Suns Proprietary Java software in Microsofts Virtual Machine. I remember there was a out of court settlement on that, which rusulted in money and Microsoft was to discontinue Using Suns Proprietary Software!


But I came accross a new twist to that story. Apearantly Kodac had proprietary rights to java software as well and has setteled out of court for $92 Mill from Sun Microsystems. Hmmm

Will the real Java software Proprietor Please Stand Up!

Link to settlement

The two cases are actually quite different.

The Sun vs Microsoft case alleged plain old contract violation -- Sun granted Microsoft a license to various aspects of Java under certain conditions, and alleged that Microsoft violated those when it introduced incompatibilities between the Microsoft VM and Sun's products.

The Kodak vs Sun case, on the other hand, is patent litigation. Kodak has patents on particular software methodologies -- note that a patent applies to an idea itself, not a particular implementation. The allegation is simply that Java does what is covered by those patents, not that Sun took any of Kodak's products or confidential information to do it. Java is still considered to be original and Sun's.

[At this point I should probably clarify that I'm not a lawyer. This is not legal advice.]

Patents are actually very wide-impact. To take a fairly pointless example, if I patent the idea of a thing which does something when it's pressed and then you build a computer mouse with a button on it, you owe me licensing fees. It doesn't matter that I never considered anything but a doorbell; your mouse infringes on my patent because it has a thing which does something when it's pressed. More importantly though, anybody using one of your mice also owes me licensing fees -- they're using my idea every time they press that thing and it does something.

Validity of patents is an interesting concept -- approval by the Patent Office or equivalent doesn't actually prove validity. There are three tests a patent has to satisfy -- it has to be of use, it has to be new, and it has to be non-obvious. The first requirement is pretty much a given, but all three have to be demonstrated in court when a patent infringement claim is made.

Unfortunately, this case was settled after a jury found that the patents were valid. That means that as it stands, Kodak's patents are valid in the US, and everyone in the US who produces or uses software covered by those patents (apart from Java, which is covered by the settlement) is potentially liable to Kodak for licensing fees.

Good stuff. :)