backtop


Print 21 comment(s) - last by Penti.. on Oct 23 at 5:23 AM


  (Source: linkapisindomedia.com)
Google had fought to keep Oracle from using the email against it

Last year, Oracle sued Google for patent infringement concerning the Android mobile operating system. Oracle claimed that Google had infringed on Java-related patents and copyrights, and Oracle had purchased the rights to Java in 2009 when it purchased Sun Microsystems for $5.6 billion.

Google said it had looked into using other programming languages for its Android mobile operating system, but they apparently didn't meet Google's standards.

"Java is essential for Android," said Al Hilwa, of research firm IDC. "Since Android has been out there for more than a year, most people would have expected they were in compliance with whatever license terms apply."

Not long before Oracle filed its lawsuit, Google had created an email saying that it needed to "negotiate a license for Java." Once the lawsuit erupted, Google fought to keep the email from being used by Oracle in the case.

But now, U.S. District Judge William Alsup ruled in an order on Thursday that the email is not protected by the attorney client privilege.

"Google has failed to identify any aspect of the challenged order that was clearly erroneous or contrary to law," said Alsup in the ruling.

While this doesn't look good for Google, Alsup already partially granted a request by Google to throw out Oracle's $2.6 billion in damages, saying that 90 percent of the Oracle patents were ruled invalid.

Reports have also noted that Google could drop parts of Java's J2SE code from the Android mobile operating system and avoid further Java-related issues with Oracle.

Source: Reuters



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: This is a big deal
By bug77 on 10/21/2011 12:03:14 PM , Rating: 4
I think this is more about the "OMG they admitted they need a license" factor than an actual infringement proof. For all we know, Google might have been considering a license in order to implement some new feature that never got implemented.

I mean, seriously, we hear maybe 1% of what goes on behind the doors during these trials, yet we are so adamant to protect one side or the other, instead of admitting ignorance. I wonder why?


RE: This is a big deal
By Horizon79 on 10/21/2011 3:29:41 PM , Rating: 2
True, we are ignorant of most of the things and are victim of what groklaw and fosspatents put up on their websites. I have found repeatedly both of them omit significant portions of the court documents.


RE: This is a big deal
By Tony Swash on 10/22/2011 3:42:42 PM , Rating: 1
Judge Alsup -- the federal judge presiding over this litigation -- attaches a great deal of importance to that particular email. At a recent hearing, he essentially said that a good trial lawyer would just need that document "and the Magna Carta" (arguably the origin of common law) to win this case on Oracle's behalf and have Google found to infringe Oracle's rights willfully. The judge told Google that "you are going to be on the losing end of this document" with "profound implications for a permanent injunction".


RE: This is a big deal
By Penti on 10/23/2011 5:23:26 AM , Rating: 2
They would only need a license if they used Suns Hotspot JVM and class library neither which they used. There are others who build royality/license free Java-implementations that is used in commercial products for example in Bluray players to support BD-J from major companies without paying Oracle America nothing. They simply opted to not use Java from Sun. Nothing strange, doing the alternative to build an unlicensed implementation of C# like Novell with licensing did would have been strange however, neither does Dalvik itself have anything to do with Hotspot or other VMs, neither are others virtual machines safe from any patens.


"When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." -- Sony BMG attorney Jennifer Pariser














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki