Newsletter sign-up
View all newsletters

Enterprise Java Newsletter
Stay up to date on the latest tutorials and Java community news posted on JavaWorld

Sponsored Links

Optimize with a SATA RAID Storage Solution
Range of capacities as low as $1250 per TB. Ideal if you currently rely on servers/disks/JBODs

Sun vs. Microsoft, Round 1

The battle for control of the Java language and its surrounding technology gets underway with a bang of the gavel

  • Print
  • Feedback

Sun Microsystems contends that by failing to implement the Java Native Interface (JNI) in its virtual machine, Microsoft prevents valid Java programs from operating correctly. In addition, Sun claims that Microsoft's inclusion of three additional compiler directives (@DLL, @COM and @SECURITY) and two additional keywords (DELEGATE and MULTICAST) produces an incompatible variant of the language. (For details on these issues, see Bill Day's accompanying article, .) In response to Sun's claims, Microsoft argues that the contract between the two parties gives it the right to make such extensions.

Background

At the outset, I attended the Sun versus Microsoft hearing with essentially no bias. As a fan of the Java technology, I am on the side of truth, justice, and all things beautiful. The truth is, the computing world has been badly fragmented into a hodgepodge of incompatible languages, language variants, and operating systems. Anything that can reverse this trend and undo this Tower of Babel situation must be a good thing. Of all the utility programs I have written over the years, most are unusable now because they were written in various (and incompatible) languages for various (and incompatible) operating systems. I wish Java had been there at the start of my career. If it had been, I would show up on a job site now with a huge collection of tools and utilities that I had written or acquired over the years, and be 10 times as productive. So if Java versions remained compatible, that would certainly be a thing of beauty.

Because I favor the Java proposition, I contract at Sun. But that doesn't stop me from criticizing the hell out of things that need improvement. You can browse The JBuilder 2 Bible (now available from IDG Books) to gauge the truth of that statement. But, much as I wanted the outcome to favor compatibility, I had no idea whether the contract was written well enough to do so. Truth and beauty are one thing. Justice is another. It was with that question in mind that I entered the courtroom.

Let the battle begin

I've always thought that courtroom proceedings would be dry and dull affairs. But at this one, I found myself gravitating to the edge of my seat a lot. Maybe it was the high stakes: On this day, in this room, the future of an entire industry was being decided. As the proceedings unfolded, my interest was also piqued by their combative nature. In cross examination, the lawyers looked like champions of old -- jousting for their cause.

The proceedings involved the typical direct examination, whereby witnesses are led by their own attorneys, and cross-examination by the opposing attorneys. Each side had a total of four hours in which to make their case, plus a final 45 minutes for summary argument. The resultant time pressure and necessity for managing the clock made the lawyers look like grandmaster chess players, banging the clock after each move, in attempt to make all their moves in the allotted time.

Arching over everything was the matter of strategy. Sun's attorneys seemed content to bring out the facts and let them speak for themselves. Microsoft's attorneys engaged in a variety of legal maneuvers and a variety of arguments, as the defense is entitled to do. In all respects, Sun's counsel appeared superlative. In the opinion of this observer, their efforts carried the day. Whether that conclusion is shared by the judiciary remains to be seen. The remainder of this article examines the main arguments made by each side so you can reach your own conclusions.

  • Print
  • Feedback

Resources
  • Sun legal documents
    http://java.sun.com/lawsuit
  • Request for injunction (and arguments justifying it)
    http://java.sun.com/lawsuit/051498.unfair.html
  • Original Technology Licensing and Distribution Agreement (TLDA)
    http://java.sun.com/lawsuit/document.html
  • Note: When you see the word redacted in these documents, it means that material has been removed in order to protect trade secrets. It's like "retracted", except the text isn't actually taken back -- it's simply not present in the version you are reading. Interestingly, the space it occupied is still there, so you can gauge how much of the document was redacted.