Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Oracle v. Google Trial On Indefinite Hold

Posted by Soulskill on from the hurry-up-and-wait dept.

symbolset writes "The trial in which Oracle is suing Google over Android has been put on indefinite hold by the trial judge, until Oracle comes up with a credible methodology for figuring alleged damages. The trial was planned to start on or after March 19."

29 of 66 comments (clear)

  1. But he's Larry Ellison... by crovira · · Score: 2

    What other proof do you need???

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  2. Pricless! by sgt+scrub · · Score: 2

    er... The judges decision, not the IP.

    --
    Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    1. Re:Pricless! by poetmatt · · Score: 2

      Wha?

      You're absolutely correct. The IP in this case is worth absolutely zero, because the patents in this lawsuit are questionable at best.

    2. Re:Pricless! by idontgno · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's better than that, too.

      Oracle is responsible for delays which is jeopardizing its own case. If you read through the Groklaw articles about this case, it's pretty clear that Oracle's patents are being disintegrated by the Patent and Trademark Office's reexaminations.. They've already lost about half of their asserted claims in the case, and they run the risk of further invalidation of the patents they're asserting here if they delay any further.

      It would be hilariously ironic if they finally come up with a credible damages assessment just about the same time all of their patents completely evaporate.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    3. Re:Pricless! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, most of the herd seems to take your position. Many of us have looked at the patents, as have many others. All but three patents are complete bullshit and extremely obvious. Basically, they should have NEVER been approved in the first place. Of the remaining three, one is seriously suspect but simply required deeper inspection. Which basically means, of the long list of patents Oracle clubbed Google over the head with, only two MIGHT have ANY validity. And of the two, its widely believed only ONE is worthy of any actual research and even that one is reasonably bogus.

      Long story short, if by "masturabte", you mean, "ignore bullshit by ignorant masses on slashdot", then you're spot on.

    4. Re:Pricless! by gutnor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Too bad the judges are not so discerning with the small people. Oracle needs to come with a convincing methodology. Does the RIAA have one ? Also, since regardless who win, the end-user will not be affected whatsoever - I think that would be better for Oracle to win to highlight in a bit more spectacular fashion the idiocy of the current patent system. (well, hopefully there is still some fun to be had on the mobile market - hopefully they don't settle and cross-license )

  3. Stratospheric numbers by Gibgezr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "For this “delay,” Oracle has no one to blame but itself, given that twice now it has advanced improper methodologies obviously calculated to reach stratospheric numbers." - Judge Alsup He isn't pulling any punches, is he?

    1. Re:Stratospheric numbers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Again, the judge here wants a credible methodology, not the patented numerical rectal extraction technique that Oracle uses for that.

    2. Re:Stratospheric numbers by Mathinker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > Oracle has no one to blame but itself

      Where does this judge live? The MPAA, RIAA, and BSA have been doing this for years, now, no? And as far as I know, no US judge has called them out when they cite their "research" as background information in a court case.

    3. Re:Stratospheric numbers by gv250 · · Score: 2

      Oracle was actually hoping for astronomical numbers. By asking for only stratospheric numbers, they were hoping to appear reasonable by comparison.

    4. Re:Stratospheric numbers by Pieroxy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Oracle has no one to blame but itself

      Where does this judge live? The MPAA, RIAA, and BSA have been doing this for years, now, no? And as far as I know, no US judge has called them out when they cite their "research" as background information in a court case.

      I don't think MPAA or RIAA has been suing anyone on patents grounds yet.

      --
      Write boring code, not shiny code!
    5. Re:Stratospheric numbers by CarlDenny · · Score: 2, Informative

      Willful patent infringement is 3x damages. So if they asked for $2billion up front, $6billion is a reasonable extrapolation.

      Not that any part of the patent process in tech is reasonable.

    6. Re:Stratospheric numbers by jd2112 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Using RIAA methodologies results with damages exceeding the entire economic output of the entire world for several decades. MPAA methodologies result in neither Oracle or Google ever having turned a profit despite both being among the most successful companies of all time.

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    7. Re:Stratospheric numbers by tlhIngan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "For this âoedelay,â Oracle has no one to blame but itself, given that twice now it has advanced improper methodologies obviously calculated to reach stratospheric numbers." - Judge Alsup He isn't pulling any punches, is he?

      Well, it's an indefinite hold. Which means that the longer it goes on, the more painful it can get. Oracle may simple just wait until the numbers are right.

      Given $2B in damagers, and Google has admitted to at least 200M Android devices have been activated, that's $10/device. One reasonable method is to see how much Oracle charges for a J2ME license to begin with (it's one of the biggest sources of money in Java - given all the featurephones out there with a JVM).

      Oracle may argue that since Samsung/LG/HTC pay Microsoft around $5 per Android to license Microsoft's patents, perhaps since Oracle's is more fundamental to Android (being possibly related to the whole runtime system), they ought to get $10 per device.

      And they can argue that since the true number of Android devices out there isn't known because of its open-source nature, blah blah blah...

      The MPAA/RIAA can ask for huge numbers becaues there isn't concrete numbers to base their numbers off of. Here there are, at least official Google Android numbers, and they don't work out to something completely crazy like $150,000 per 99 cent track.

    8. Re:Stratospheric numbers by DragonWriter · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, it's an indefinite hold. Which means that the longer it goes on, the more painful it can get. Oracle may simple just wait until the numbers are right.

      If Oracle doesn't produce a viable calculation (and even before they next produce one -- the court is still considering whether they get a third try or not) then they simply don't get to put their theory on damages forward at all. And they don't have unlimited basis to put forward new theories, they have to cure specific problems in their previously-advanced calculations.

  4. Credible? by Kid+Zero · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Credible Methodology? That doesn't stop the MPAA/RIAA....

    1. Re:Credible? by hedwards · · Score: 2

      Precisely and as long as they can ask for statutory damages there's very little that the judge can do. I think pretty much the only thing the judicial system can do is find the practice unconstitutional.

      This is why courts generally require the plaintiff to prove damages, it's easy to ask for a figure and harder to ask for an appropriate sum.

    2. Re:Credible? by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 2

      RIAA: Statutory damages = $150,000, actual damages = $0.50 (lost wholesale price). Amount of punitive damages = $149,999.50, which is 299,999x the actual damages. The constitutional limit on punitive damages 10x actual damages.

    3. Re:Credible? by hey! · · Score: 2

      That's irrelevant. Oracle is suing a company with the cash to fight back. That makes it a "big" case, and I suspect big cases get better judges.

      In any case crazy damage claims are part of the "shock and awe" campaign by the *AA's. It's the "no bad publicity" principle. If they don't win those damages, the *claim* makes news. If they're awarded what they claim and it's overturned on appeal, they get *two* bites of the publicity apple.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  5. humour by rwv · · Score: 4, Funny

    From TFA:

    After seeing these filings I can't help but note the irony (and hubris) of a company choosing to name itself Oracle when it seems to be incapable of "giving wise or authoritative decisions or opinions."

    Is Groklaw usually this funny?

    1. Re:humour by nomorecwrd · · Score: 3, Funny

      The Oracle has always being misleading in its answers.

  6. Will Oracle Now Drop Java? by turkeyfish · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Now that their primary purpose for buying Sun's Java technology is no longer useful to them, ie leveraging Java as a way of extorting profits, will Ellison abandon Java? Both are costing him a lot of money without material benefit. At some point will he give up the ghost and just abandon the whole thing or will he keep pumping money into it, hoping against hope to hit pay dirt?

    1. Re:Will Oracle Now Drop Java? by sourcerror · · Score: 2

      Lot of Oracle products rely on Java (data mining/business analyst stuff), so it's not very likely. They just like too much governing over JSR/JCP.

    2. Re:Will Oracle Now Drop Java? by PerfectionLost · · Score: 2

      Doubtful. PeopleSoft runs on a backend of Java Application Servers like tomcat or BEA (which they also own), and PeopleSoft is extrodinarily profitable.

    3. Re:Will Oracle Now Drop Java? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Now that their primary purpose for buying Sun's Java technology is no longer useful to them, ie leveraging Java as a way of extorting profits, will Ellison abandon Java? Both are costing him a lot of money without material benefit. At some point will he give up the ghost and just abandon the whole thing or will he keep pumping money into it, hoping against hope to hit pay dirt?

      Ummm, no. The main reason Oracle bought java is that almost all of Oracle's software stack depends on java.

      Without java, Oracle would be nearly helpless. A hostile java owner could cause Oracle an enormous amount of grief.

      Anything else that Oracle can get out of java is just icing on the cake.

  7. who is this guy? by Un+pobre+guey · · Score: 2

    What? What kind of judge doesn't impose ex recto damages? What planet is he from?

  8. Re:The Oracle by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 2

    Can we get some Matrix Analogies?

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  9. Grocklaw ultimate irony by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 2
    To quote Slashdot's favorite legal assistant:

    "After seeing these filings I can't help but note the irony (and hubris) of a company choosing to name itself Oracle when it seems to be incapable of "giving wise or authoritative decisions or opinions."

    --
    Will
  10. Oracle damage calculation method by mbkennel · · Score: 2

    Larry: I hold up my pinky, and it tells me the number. Like a fucking oracle, it is.