Re: Sun sues Microsoft over Java

On 10/08/97, Craig A Summerhill <craig[_at_]cni.org> wrote:
>
> [ In a somewhat more serious direction regarding Microsoft-related
> lawsuits. (Loved the joke though, Robert) ].
>
> <SNIP>
>
> Does anybody have more specifics?
>
> "Sun Sues Microsoft Over Java"
> by Elizabeth Corcoran
> Washington Post
> Wed. Oct 8, 1997
> C13,21
> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1997-10/08/059l-100897-idx.html>

Here's what Internetweek sent me:

Sun Sues Microsoft Over Java

Sun Microsystems yesterday filed suit against Microsoft to prevent the software giant from using Java technology in its products.

The suit, which Sun said it filed in U.S. District Court, charges Microsoft with trademark infringement and breach of contract, among other allegations. Sun is seeking an injunction to stop Microsoft from shipping what Sun claims are incompatible implementations of Sun's Java programming language.

Aside from its claims that Microsoft's implementation harms the Java brand, Sun said Microsoft is out of compliance with its license because it did not include the Java RMI, or Remote Method Invocation, and did not activate the Java Native Interfaces. RMI provides application-to-application connectivity among applications written in Java while the JNI deals with portability among Java applications optimized for a specific platform.

Microsoft officials said two weeks ago that they believed they were in compliance, and that its agreement with Sun was different than the one Sun's other 117 licensees signed.

But in a press conference yesterday, Sun Microsystems CEO Scott McNealy said this was not the case. "Compatibility components are pretty much standard across the board," he said. "These are not arguable issues." Neither Sun nor Microsoft has released the specifics of their license agreement, calling this a private document. By David Joachim and Ellis Booker

   http://techweb.cmp.com/internetwk/news/news1007-5.htm

And heres what Informationweek sent:

___Sun Sues Microsoft Over Java ___
Sun Microsystems today sued rival Microsoft over its Java run-time implementation in Internet Explorer 4.0 and Microsoft's software developers' kit for Java. The suit, which claims Microsoft has secretly modified its Java implementation to break Java's portability, was filed this morning in U.S. District Court in San Jose, Calif.

The complaint claims Microsoft's Internet Explorer 4.0 browser and associated SDK fail Sun's extensive Javacompatibility  test suite. The suit also alleges breach of contract, trademark infringement, false advertising, unfair competition, and interference with prospective economic advantage.

Key to IE4's failure to complete the test suite are Microsoft's lack of support for RMI (Remote Method Invocation) and JNI (Java Native Interface). RMI is used to control Java objects in remote systems, while JNI provides a cross-platform means of linking Java with binary applications, such as those written in C++.

Microsoft has long stated it would not support RMI and JNI, as both technologies compete with Microsoft alternatives, such as DCOM and J/Direct. But Sun's suit adds a new and unseemly wrinkle to the dispute. Sun's complaint also accuses Microsoft of secretly extending Java's standard class libraries with Win32-specific extensions, thereby binding Java applications to Windows operating systems without programmer knowledge or intent.

The suit seeks a "preliminary and permanent" injunction to prevent Microsoft from using Java trademarks, including the Java logo. It's not clear if the suit seeks to prevent Microsoft from distributing Internet Explorer 4.0, which includes a Java virtual machine and class libraries.

David Smith, research director at the Gartner Group in Stamford, Conn., says the immediate impact on users will be minor because the Java technologies are rather "obscure." Sun's thrust into the legal arena, however, casts a cloud of uncertainty for developers and users of Java that is unlikely to go away anytime soon. "Both sides have really dug in on this," Smith says. "It's very hard for us to see Microsoft finding a way to settle this and save face."

In response to the lawsuit, Microsoft officials issued a terse statement. It said, in part, "We have not yet seen the complaint, but based on the accounts we have seen, Sun's claims are outrageous. Microsoft has delivered the most compatible implementation of Java on the marketplace, and is well within the terms of our agreement. Since this is a matter now in active litigation, we will not be speaking about the details of the case in the press." -- Rich Levin

______Sun's McNealy Lashes Out At Microsoft______ Sun Microsystems chairman Scott McNealy explained yesterday at the Gartner Itxpo in Orlando, Fla., why he decided to sue Microsoft.

"This is basically a branding issue," he said, because the contract explicitly prohibits licensees from using the Java logo on products that are not fully compliant with Sun's standards. "IE 4.0 is not Java-compliant," he added. "You're taking a 'very serious risk' using it. When the customer sees the [Java] logo they should know JDK 1.1 is in there." McNealy emphasized that Microsoft users will still be able to use Java applets on their Windows machines but said their best move would be to "go out and buy Navigator."

Talks between Sun and Microsoft broke down 10 days ago. McNealy said a review of IE 4.0 released last week convinced him that he had to take action to defend Sun's Java brand and to send Microsoft a clear message that it has finally crossed the line in its effort to undermine the emerging programming language. He also said Microsoft's effort to undermine Java is "a little like Kleenex being a little disappointed that there's been a cure for the common cold."

McNealy said he was unsure what the outcome might be in court, and seemed to place little hope in resolving the issue with Microsoft, but also said, "We have to discuss with (Microsoft) how to get Explorer back into compliance immediately." He said that would include what to do about the versions of IE 4.0 already in the market, and damage to the Java brand and users. -- Greg Dalton

Regards,
David F. Crosby
dcrosby[_at_]lappinkusmer.com Received on Thu Oct 09 1997 - 16:51:14 GMT