OP
deathwish
Are you dead yet?
True. Google is no nOOb. However, losing a billion dollars is always a big deal. They have a workforce of thousands and spend millions (or maybe even billions) in R&D. So this loss could directly affect them all, and Google will not want that.
Liverpool_fan
Sami Hyypiä, LFC legend
Oracle is a patent troll. And there's nothing worse than them winning this lawsuit, not in the money Google will have to shed, but as a precedant as well.
OP
deathwish
Are you dead yet?
I think Oracle has a point. If Google is modifying the Java code (clearly patented to Oracle and Sun) for application in Android systems without prior permission, then they cannot complain when they are charged with a lawsuit.
However, we cannot comment too much about this as they haven't released much information on the nature or details of the lawsuit.
However, we cannot comment too much about this as they haven't released much information on the nature or details of the lawsuit.
Was there any point of being on that ship?
OP
deathwish
Are you dead yet?
Brilliant read. This takes the cake for most pointless lawsuits!!
sygeek
Technomancer
Oracle seeks billions in Google lawsuit - San Jose Mercury News
Oracle (ORCL) has put a multibillion-dollar price tag on its claim that Google (GOOG) built the popular Android software by using some of Oracle's Java code without permission, according to documents filed Thursday in San Jose federal court.
Google is disputing Oracle's claims for patent and copyright infringement, but recent court filings indicate Oracle is seeking a share of Google's extensive advertising revenue in damages for the alleged violations.
The case is being watched closely in the tech world because it could have broad implications for the commercial software and mobile computing industries.
Oracle acquired rights to the widely used Java programming language when it bought Sun Microsystems last year. Google, meanwhile, has made its Android operating system into one of the most popular platforms for smartphones and tablets in the world.
The two tech giants have been wrangling in court for months, attempting to define complex technical and financial issues before a scheduled trial date this fall. Many of their arguments have been filed under seal, on the grounds they concern proprietary business information.
Oracle's
damage estimate surfaced Thursday as the companies exchanged arguments over an analysis by one of Oracle's experts, Boston University business professor Iain Cockburn. Google had asked a judge to seal its motion attacking that analysis, but Oracle filed papers arguing there is no reason to hide some information, including "the fact that Oracle's damages claims in this case are in the billions of dollars."
While Google lets device makers use Android for little or no cost, the Mountain View company makes money when users turn to Google's search engine and click on advertising that's related to search results.
In court papers, Google has said its advertising revenue should not be at stake. It argued that "the value of the Android software and of Google's ads are entirely separate" because the advertising is powered by other software that works on both Android and non-Android devices.
Google also contends that Cockburn's estimates are based on "fundamental legal errors" and fall into a range that is "orders of magnitude beyond any reasonable valuation of the intellectual property at issue."
Attorneys for Oracle, however, said in a court filing that their claims "are based on both accepted methodology and a wealth of concrete evidence. They should not be hidden from public view." U.S. District Judge William Alsup agreed on that last point, ruling that Google must file its response as a public record.
Oracle has a track record of aggressively guarding its intellectual property. Last fall, the Redwood City company won a $1.3 billion jury award against SAP, a German software company that Oracle sued for using its programs without authorization.
Google is disputing Oracle's claims for patent and copyright infringement, but recent court filings indicate Oracle is seeking a share of Google's extensive advertising revenue in damages for the alleged violations.
The case is being watched closely in the tech world because it could have broad implications for the commercial software and mobile computing industries.
Oracle acquired rights to the widely used Java programming language when it bought Sun Microsystems last year. Google, meanwhile, has made its Android operating system into one of the most popular platforms for smartphones and tablets in the world.
The two tech giants have been wrangling in court for months, attempting to define complex technical and financial issues before a scheduled trial date this fall. Many of their arguments have been filed under seal, on the grounds they concern proprietary business information.
Oracle's
damage estimate surfaced Thursday as the companies exchanged arguments over an analysis by one of Oracle's experts, Boston University business professor Iain Cockburn. Google had asked a judge to seal its motion attacking that analysis, but Oracle filed papers arguing there is no reason to hide some information, including "the fact that Oracle's damages claims in this case are in the billions of dollars."
While Google lets device makers use Android for little or no cost, the Mountain View company makes money when users turn to Google's search engine and click on advertising that's related to search results.
In court papers, Google has said its advertising revenue should not be at stake. It argued that "the value of the Android software and of Google's ads are entirely separate" because the advertising is powered by other software that works on both Android and non-Android devices.
Google also contends that Cockburn's estimates are based on "fundamental legal errors" and fall into a range that is "orders of magnitude beyond any reasonable valuation of the intellectual property at issue."
Attorneys for Oracle, however, said in a court filing that their claims "are based on both accepted methodology and a wealth of concrete evidence. They should not be hidden from public view." U.S. District Judge William Alsup agreed on that last point, ruling that Google must file its response as a public record.
Oracle has a track record of aggressively guarding its intellectual property. Last fall, the Redwood City company won a $1.3 billion jury award against SAP, a German software company that Oracle sued for using its programs without authorization.
Tejas.Gupta
Ethical Hacker :)
gameranand
Living to Play
I hope Oracle looses this. I hate that company previously they shut down Open Office and then developers had to rename it.
sygeek
Technomancer
Oracle's patents case against Google weakening
Oracle's patents case against Google weakening
Oracle's Java infringement case against Google isn't going exceptionally well for the database giant these days, with another setback delivered by the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in the form of a patent reexamination this week.
Historically, things haven't been rosy for Oracle since their August 2010 lawsuit was launched, accusing Google of infringing on Oracle's Java software.
Oracle acquired Sun Microsystems' Java technology when it bought the company in 2010. Instead of licensing Java from Oracle to use in Android, Google developed a "clean room" version of the Java virtual machine, Dalvik, for Android instead. Oracle says that Dalvik deliberately infringes on Java anyway, despite efforts to build Dalvik from scratch.
In May of this year the judge in the case, the Hon. William Alsup, proposed to scale back Oracle's original 132 patent infringement claims to a mere three. This was seen as big setback in Oracle's case.
Oracle countered with a request to assert 21 patent claims against Google and a request to hold off any decision to narrow the number of claims until the final pre-trial conference. Alsup honored that request, but he is holding what could be Google's eventual salvation in this case up his sleeve: the option to stay the case until all of the patents in question are reexamined by the USPTO for validity.
That reexamination process could take years and, as evidenced this week, may not work out so well for Oracle, either.
According to Groklaw, one of the patents Oracle wants to use against Google, U.S. Patent 6192476, just had its reexamination completed. The findings? Seventeen of the patent's 21 claims were rejected, seriously weakening the patent for use in a lawsuit.
That puts Oracle in a pickle. If they fight too hard on the number of claims asserted, Alsup will very likely just say the heck with it and order all of Oracle's asserted patents to be reexamined so the court will know without a doubt what patents have merit and what don't. That will take a long time and will seriously delay Oracle's plan to monetize their Java investment through litigation.
But, if Oracle agrees to Alsup's final order on number of patents, there is a real possibility that the patents Oracle chooses could get invalidated anyway, if they don't pick ones that have merit. Not too mention they have to be patents that they can prove Google infringed. Strategically, the broader the patent claims, the better chance Google could be found guilty by a jury of infringement. But if reexamination finds such broad patents invalid, even after a trial is over, the patent holder is owed nothing.
Google, clearly, would like a stay to reexamine everything. That kind of time just lets Android march right along without interference from Oracle. Hardware vendors who might have been secondary targets for Oracle may get a break too, because they could also request reexaminations to stall Oracle.
We'll have to see what Alsup decides, but this case is far from the slam-dunk Android's detractors would have you think.
Historically, things haven't been rosy for Oracle since their August 2010 lawsuit was launched, accusing Google of infringing on Oracle's Java software.
Oracle acquired Sun Microsystems' Java technology when it bought the company in 2010. Instead of licensing Java from Oracle to use in Android, Google developed a "clean room" version of the Java virtual machine, Dalvik, for Android instead. Oracle says that Dalvik deliberately infringes on Java anyway, despite efforts to build Dalvik from scratch.
In May of this year the judge in the case, the Hon. William Alsup, proposed to scale back Oracle's original 132 patent infringement claims to a mere three. This was seen as big setback in Oracle's case.
Oracle countered with a request to assert 21 patent claims against Google and a request to hold off any decision to narrow the number of claims until the final pre-trial conference. Alsup honored that request, but he is holding what could be Google's eventual salvation in this case up his sleeve: the option to stay the case until all of the patents in question are reexamined by the USPTO for validity.
That reexamination process could take years and, as evidenced this week, may not work out so well for Oracle, either.
According to Groklaw, one of the patents Oracle wants to use against Google, U.S. Patent 6192476, just had its reexamination completed. The findings? Seventeen of the patent's 21 claims were rejected, seriously weakening the patent for use in a lawsuit.
That puts Oracle in a pickle. If they fight too hard on the number of claims asserted, Alsup will very likely just say the heck with it and order all of Oracle's asserted patents to be reexamined so the court will know without a doubt what patents have merit and what don't. That will take a long time and will seriously delay Oracle's plan to monetize their Java investment through litigation.
But, if Oracle agrees to Alsup's final order on number of patents, there is a real possibility that the patents Oracle chooses could get invalidated anyway, if they don't pick ones that have merit. Not too mention they have to be patents that they can prove Google infringed. Strategically, the broader the patent claims, the better chance Google could be found guilty by a jury of infringement. But if reexamination finds such broad patents invalid, even after a trial is over, the patent holder is owed nothing.
Google, clearly, would like a stay to reexamine everything. That kind of time just lets Android march right along without interference from Oracle. Hardware vendors who might have been secondary targets for Oracle may get a break too, because they could also request reexaminations to stall Oracle.
We'll have to see what Alsup decides, but this case is far from the slam-dunk Android's detractors would have you think.
thetechfreak
Legend Never Ends
This is a battle I dont expect to end soon.
anyways,thanks for link Sygeek
anyways,thanks for link Sygeek