backtop


Print 17 comment(s) - last by eachus.. on Mar 27 at 4:39 PM


  (Source: Trip Advisor/James Lynwood)
Google may pay a bit in ongoing licensing fees, but the settlement for past damages will be small

Oracle Corp. (ORCL) aggressively pursued Google Inc. (GOOG) for reportedly knowingly infringing on Oracle's Java intellectual property via an unlicensed Apache open source distribution.  The Java IP had been acquired by Oracle in its April 2009 acquisition of Sun Microsystems.

I. From a $6B USD Case to a $100M USD One

In Oracle's lawsuit, both sides fought hard in court.  Oracle scored court permission to use multiple emails from top Google executives and Android engineers, which cumulatively indicated that it may have knowingly have violated Oracle's intellectual property.  Google returned fire, airing a 2007 statement from ex-Sun Microsystems CEO Jonathan Schwartz endorsing Google's use, which indicated that it might have been unofficially authorized/condoned after all.

However, it appears Google is prepared to come out relatively well from the patent dispute.  While Oracle had sought up to $6.1B USD in infringement damages, ultimately, it will almost certainly end up with less than $100M USD in damages for pass infringement.

That's a huge win for Google and its Android partners.

The lower settlement estimations come based on Oracle's expert witness Dr. Iain M. Cockburn, who is a professor of finance and economics at Boston University.  Dr. Cockburn initially had delivered an estimate of $1.4B-$6.1B USD.

U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup, who at times has admonished both Google and Oracle, voiced critism about Dr. Cockburn's initial approach.  He pointed out that of Oracle's 22 acquired Java patents, Dr. Cockburn had drastically upgraded the value of the 6 in contention in the case.  He ruled that only an equal valuation of the entire portfolio was possible.

II. Oracle Sets Its Sights Lower

Dr. Cockburn was forced to deliver a new valuation, which was much lower.  Ultimately it looks like Oracle may get ~$5M USD for direct infringment of U.S. Patent No. 5966702 "Method And Apparatus For Preprocessing And Packaging Class Files", and U.S. Patent No. 6910205 "Interpreting Functions Utilizing A Hybrid Of Virtual And Native Machine Instructions", according to Groklaw.

It will then get an extra $27M-$37M USD for the copyright infringement.  Overall this will all stack up to about $40M USD.

Android smartphones
Android may get off in the Oracle lawsuit surprisingly easy [Image Source: Android and Me]

Here's where it get's a bit confusing -- Oracle has already withdrew its claim on the '205 patent, as it was invalidated by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.  But Google is now also being sued for another second patent -- U.S. Patent No. 6,061,520 "Method and system for performing static initialization".  This won't likely lead to any big shift in the settlement amount, but it means there may be a mistake in some of the court documents from Google/Judge Alsup, printed by Groklaw, which refer to the '205 (invalid) patent, when in fact it appears they mean the '520 (asserted) patent.

What does all this mean?  Google will likely pay less that $100M USD in damages, a small slap to the world's largest smartphone OS maker.  It will likely have to pay a bit of ongoing royalties, but with only 2 asserted patents, it's unclear whether that sum will be truly that onerous versus the 6, highly overvalued patents that Oracle originally hoped to beat money out of Google with.

Source: Groklaw



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: Poor Tony
By Pirks on 3/23/2012 8:49:33 PM , Rating: 0
Good point, indeed Google seems to be still on the hook. I did not see this FOSS post, my bad.


RE: Poor Tony
By Iuconnu on 3/23/2012 9:46:07 PM , Rating: 2
You guys are hilarious. How long do you think it will take to do a clean-room re-implementation of whatever Java classes the court decides are covered by Oracle copyright? Some effort for sure, $30-40 million worth of effort? Not on your life.

Patents could have had some serious impact since they can be very hard to engineer around and have a long period of validity. Software copyright just prohibits substantial copying of the code, not the ideas or the API.

Copyright != Patent

Florian Mueller mostly does a decent job covering these issues, but he certainly isn't averse to a bit of sensationalism.


RE: Poor Tony
By Tony Swash on 3/24/12, Rating: -1
RE: Poor Tony
By elleehswon on 3/24/2012 12:39:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Presumably about as fast as the speed with which Ice Cream Sandwich has been deployed on Android devices

Here is a clue: ICE was released five months ago and has already reached a staggering 1.6% of Android devices.


good job correlating irrelevant statistics for the purpose of an attempted shameless dig. By that notion, my car has twice as many tires as a bicycle and your mother is fat.


RE: Poor Tony
By Cheesew1z69 on 3/24/2012 12:39:51 PM , Rating: 2
That's typical iTool Tony for ya...


RE: Poor Tony
By eachus on 3/27/2012 4:39:41 PM , Rating: 2
Actually the copyright part of the case is a pretty novel theory. Android does not use the APIs to access a similar Java Virtual Machine, they access a Dalvik virtual machine. And this isn't just being cute--Google needed a real-time VM, which Sun/Oracle did not have at the time. So the API calls although identical in form, access different semantics.

Anyway, given the Mayo Clinic decision by the US Supreme Court last week, I think that Oracle would be lucky to get off at this point for under $100 million. Well, the judge basically told the parties that there is nothing much left of the case to decide, so go settle. Google may be willing to walk away and pay their own costs, if Oracle offers a free patent and copyright license to Google. Does it really look that bad for Oracle? Sure. Their patents are falling left and right, the API claims are a significant stretch, and given the pre-trial decisions on what some phrases mean, Oracle chances on the API issue are between slim and none. (Google's counterclaims are such that they can't realistically be decided until the Oracle patent and copyright issues are resolved. So at least they are still standing at this point.)


RE: Poor Tony
By sprockkets on 3/25/2012 1:12:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You guys are hilarious. How long do you think it will take to do a clean-room re-implementation of whatever Java classes the court decides are covered by Oracle copyright?


Already been done. It's call the Apache Harmony project. Guess what? That's where Google got a lot of their stuff. It's a shame it's called copyright infringement when someone had to in some cases code something exactly the same since, well, that's the only way to do it (if that is what they are guilty of in the first place, kinda hard to keep track).


"Mac OS X is like living in a farmhouse in the country with no locks, and Windows is living in a house with bars on the windows in the bad part of town." -- Charlie Miller














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