Slashdot Mirror


Oracle Thinks Google Owes $6.1 Billion In Damages

An anonymous reader writes "When Oracle acquired Sun in 2009, the company got its hands on a lot of desirable technology. While OpenOffice may have fallen by the wayside, Oracle isn't about to let the Java programming language and its associated patents remain untouched if they can generate some additional revenue. In fact, the company is currently in the middle of a legal battle with Google over those patents that could potentially net Oracle billions and leave Android crippled. In August last year Oracle sued Google for infringing Java patents and copyright by developing Android. Oracle argues that Android uses technology derived from Java and therefore infringes multiple patents. It wants compensation, but with most court documents and details not publicly available, it's hard to know specifics. However, new documents made available late last week revealed just how much Oracle thinks is an acceptable damages payment for Google to make. According to an expert Oracle hired, Google could be looking at a bill between $1.4 billion and $6.1 billion for its alleged infringements."

14 of 243 comments (clear)

  1. New Google Strategy by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Funny

    1. Buy Oracle

    2. Sack those who are responsible for the suit.

    3. Open Java to the Public Domain

    4. Sell Oracle.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:New Google Strategy by carlosap · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oracle bought sun in 7.38B. Win 6.1 B for damages, priceless!, that was in oracle eyes before the adquisition. Quite a bargain to bought Sun!.

    2. Re:New Google Strategy by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Informative

      Even if your strategy wasn't impractical, what would make you think that Google would want to make Java public domain?

      Google, for all their recent goofs, still believes in making things available - grow through acceptance and use of technology, rather than standing over customers and developers with a fee schedule and a large club.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    3. Re:New Google Strategy by Amouth · · Score: 3, Informative

      they only need to own 51%

      Oracle's Market Cap = 161.13B

      Price to control = 80.565B

      Google's Cash on Hand = 36.67B

      so yea they are short a bit..

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
  2. Re:Obligatory by micheas · · Score: 4, Informative

    The former head of RedHat's legal team took over groklaw.

  3. Re:Ummm... by yog · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the Groklaw article: "Cockburn Offers No Meaningful Analysis Regarding Copyright Damages"

    That just about sums it up. Oracle shouldn't be picking a fight with Google; they should be thanking Google for helping to spread general Java know-how and promoting it on their phones, even if they've found a way to evade the licensing fees by using a 3rd party JVM.

    Nokia has just started a partnership with Microsoft, so Windows Mobile and Bing Search will probably be their standard platform, with Visual C# as the primary language. Blackberry still uses Java, but they're going down the tubes as fast as Nokia. Meanwhile, Apple continues to prefer Objective C. That leaves only Android as the major handheld platform for any flavor of Java.

    If Oracle wishes to spread Java on the handheld, they could maybe start by not suing the maker of Android. They should instead be negotiating with Google, trying to integrate Oracle services into Android, maybe offer Google a good deal on a fully licensed JVM that performs better than Dalvik. Wasting millions of dollars on lawyers and risking a huge schism with Google hardly seems worth it.

    Microsoft is Google's rival; Microsoft is Oracle's rival. Increasingly, Apple is Google's rival. Maybe the two should get together and unite against Microsoft (and Apple, which has little invested in Oracle's product line). Stupid lawsuits, wasting everyone's time and money. How many programmers could they have hired for the amounts they're spending and will spend on this ridiculous effort?

    --
    it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
  4. Re:Compensation for Java? by Smallpond · · Score: 4, Funny

    Offset by saving some of us from C++.

  5. Python for Android ... FTW! by Skapare · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And I hear that Google has a lot of Python running in-house already. But if fewer CPU cycle per function performed is the goal for low power mobile devices, why not just plain old C?

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    1. Re:Python for Android ... FTW! by spintriae · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I wouldn't be surprised actually if Google was developing Go for the explicit purpose of replacing Java on Android. They announced Go a few months after Oracle acquired Sun, and last month at Google I/O, Rob Pike had this to say about it.

  6. Follow the money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Java made money for Sun (now Oracle) on mobile phones, it was licensed for use there, Google did something clever (or maybe not so much) and released a phone/framework that used a previously accepted implementation of Java (heavyweight versus the 'efficient' phone version) and skirted the licensing issue altogether.

    Now Oracle feels that Google owes them licensing for 'phone' java.

    So what is Android, a phone with java? or a tiny linux system with a phone card?

    I believe this is one reason Apple wants to distance themselves from java, its going to become a headache.

  7. Re:Compensation for Java? by kimvette · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Are you serious? Are you somehow implying that Oracle isn't in the right?

    $6.1 billion in damages? Who the hell are they trying to fool? What did they lose out on: a sizable market share of free?

    Oracle suffered no damages whatsoever; most of Java is licensed under the GPL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_%28programming_language%29) so even though Google has reimplemented a lot of the functions and basically created a Java clone, Oracle has suffered no damage because it is software they GIVE AWAY FOR FREE.

    Now, before you jump on me and correct me by saying it's a patent issue, I understand the distinction. However they gave away the software under the GPL and the GPL stipulates that the software can only be distributed without being encumbered by patents, so either Oracle is right and thus is in violation of it's (Sun's) own terms for Java, and Java needs to stop being redistributed (not an entirely bad idea) or Oracle is in the wrong, and Google has done no wrong by reimplementing the Java language. In any event. Oracle is full of shit; they have suffered no damages whatsoever.

    I know Oracle hates free and their RDBMS licensing fees are completely ridiculous (licensed per core x RAM - they don't care if it's a server or if you need a seat for a development or QA lab workstation they license it based on what a given CPU "could" theoretically handle) but they fucked up; if they hate free software they should not have purchased Sun in the first place. Sun's processors were "open source," their office suite was, they opened up most of Java, and the OSes they offered (Linux, and SunOS/Solaris was eventually opened as well), and so on.

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  8. Re:Compensation for Java? by poetmatt · · Score: 4, Informative

    Note the updates from Groklaw. (link to article)

    UPDATE

    Just in case you missed it (or simply don't want to spend your time searching for it, there are at least three important takeaways conveyed in the Google brief and related documents:

            * Cockburn ignored prior negotiations between Sun and Google in which Google was offered the opportunity to license these and other patents for a fraction of Cockburn's present estimate;
            * Cockburn ignored other licensing transactions in which Sun licensed these patents for a fraction of Cockburn's present estimate (and these other licensing transactions will almost certainly become a limiting factor on any royalties Oracle may be awarded); and
            * Cockburn bases his estimate on worldwide sales of Android devices and Google revenue, despite the fact that the devices are made and used (and thus the infringement occurs) outside the U.S. and is not subject to a U.S. patent claim.

    All of this serves to indicate that the Cockburn report, while sensational, has little or no bearing on a likely outcome of this case

  9. Beware "placed" articles by davecb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Groklaw also identified this as FUD, also known as "trying the case in the newspapers".

    --dave

    --
    davecb@spamcop.net
  10. Couple of errors there by Estanislao+Mart�nez · · Score: 3, Insightful

    First of all, cash isn't the only method for corporate acquisitions. The other one is that they buyer can trade their own equity for the purchase; "I'll give you n shares of my stock for each m shares of yours." This can be combined with cash, but cash is part of the buyer's market cap too, so to estimate one company's capacity to buy another, you look at the market cap, not at the cash reserves. GOOG are 155.99B, so they'd still have to give away more than half of their company to get half of Oracle.

    Second, when a company is interested in buying a second one, they usually have to pay premium to convince the target's owners to sells. Buying Oracle would cost more than Oracle's market cap—or more precisely, a serious intent to buy Oracle would drive up Oracle's price.