Slashdot Mirror
Google To Pay $0 To Oracle In Copyright Case
An anonymous reader writes "In a hearing in the US District Court today, it was determined that Google will pay a net total of nothing for Oracle's patent claims against them. In fact, Google is given 14 days to file an application for Oracle to pay legal fees to Google (in a similar manner to how things are done for frivolous lawsuits). However, it is not quite peaches and roses for Google, as Oracle is planning on appealing the decision in the case.'"
So Oracle is all, "well, we got screwed because we got the smart judge. Maybe in an appeal we can get the dilhole judge. The one who can't write rangeCheck in 2 minutes."
The best part of the article is in how they came up with the zero dollar figure. You can't make this stuff up. Well, I suppose you could...
This signature intentionally left blank.
It blows my mind that Google can use a fairly complete Java clone over Oracles objections and pay nothing, while Apple sues people's socks off for making tablets shaped like rounded rectangles, and adding bounce to their scrollable views. I'm not a fan of software patents, so not saying I'm unhappy with the result. Just weirded out at the cluelessness of the legal system.
It's incredible that expert Mueller still puts a positive spin on the case...from predicting "triple damages" to Oracle, to what he termed as the "smoking gun Lindholm email", to the general disdain of anything not sanctioned by his cronies.
When one visits his blog, you cannot fail to see the little coverage he accords news unfavorable to those who bankroll him.
Would there be a risk of being considered in contempt of court if one were to write a gigantic novelty check for the value of $Zero, sign it with a flourish, and hand it to the opposing counsel?
Appealing
Google: I'm going to write a figure on this piece of paper. It's not quite as large as the last one, but I think you'll find it fair.
Oracle's Lawyers: I think we should take it.
it started on patents. when bullshit was called, it moved to copyright infringement of the headers.
that's the big problem - to not use a car analogy, think of a program as like a giant recipe. the code is the method, the headers are the ingredients list. Oracle wanted to assert imaginary copyright on the lists of ingredients for Java.
i use the food analogy because food recipes are not copyrightable. you can steal all the recipes from all the cookbooks and publish them yourself and be perfectly fine, so long as you don't copy the photos or pontificating between recipes.
also note that cookbooks sell very very well in spite of this.
Corporate lawsuits never involve such small numbers.
I believe you meant $00,000,000
Alright, who has Oracle's big pile of nothing... :)
Google is given 14 days to file an application for Oracle to pay legal fees to Google
Dammit... where is Slashdot's "like" button??
Note that recipes can be patented, however, so long as the recipe does something particularly novel and non-obvious. Like tomato beer, or salsa without spicy chili peppers. Software patents are kind of dumb, though, because it's awfully hard to think of a series of programming lines as non-obvious.
This clearly show that the court is manned by laymen... they should have made the decision that the ammount should be null, not zero.
I hope this becomes precedent for dealing with patent trolls.
I COULD be mistaken, but didn't sun open source java before oracle bought them. If so, wouldn't it invalidate the claim, as google would have a prior license.
It was a two part trial. One part was on copyright infringement and the other part was on patent infringement. The outcome was that Google violated Oracle copyrights on 9 lines of code (out of 15 million) and some test cases. Google was not found to have infringed on any Oracle patents. The judge decided that the damages amounted to $0 for the copyright violations. Oracle can appeal.
So will the new Oracle headquarters be inside the vulcano on Lanai? Next thing you know, he'll be putting lasers on the moon.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
Narcisissm makes that Oracle will find themselves appealing?
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
Hopefully it will never be patented.
Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
People said similar things about SCO at one point.
"Laser" is a fucking acronym for "Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation"
Until "Ztimulated" is a word, stop throwing a "z" in there, you fucking kumquat!
So what are you buying on the software if not to use the software? If nothing, then P2P sharing is legal since nothing of value is shared. If "the code, but not the right to use it", then it's a post-sale restriction with no consideration made.
EULAs are not legally enforcable. It's why so many games are going online-only (even if they have a Single Player mode) because a ToS *is* legally enforcable.
Blizzard LOST their case against BnetD using their EULA. They won their case using the ToS.
Because the EULA is not a legal agreement.
The article says the suit was about whether the APIs could be patented. That is not so - the suit was about whether the APIs could be copyrighted. The article author probably has no idea what he is talking about.
Island soon to be covered in condos rented to Oracle's many, many lawyers so they can recover in comfort from the shock of a judge explaining to them that their client's suit had no merit. Not nice. Before long when Ellison picks up the phone to his lawyers they'll be out working on more important cases - contested parking tickets, for instance. Going to court with zilch case may be the fault of the client, but it still won't look good on his lawyers' CVs.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Oracle was also suing over the use of two patents.
The jury ruled that no patent infringement occurred.
Then the judge ruled that APIs weren't copyrightable.
Which left Oracle with only the jury's ruling that the Rangecheck() function was used in violation of copyright.
Which was what the $0 award was for - Google's use of rangecheck....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Nope. The judge did no such thing.
Oracle was entitled to statutory damages, which give damages within a specified range with some discretion by the judge. The PARTIES, and NOT THE JUDGE stipulated to setting the award at $0. Basically, they told the judge not to bother - they agreed $0 was fine.
If you're wondering why Oracle agreed to $0 damages, when they could have had "more than $0," it was probably for two reasons. First, the amount they were likely to be awarded was chump change - in the hundreds to low thousands of dollars. Not worth the time it would take a lawyer to brief on it. Second, setting the damages now without waiting for the judge allows the final judgement to be entered, which is a necessary step for Oracle to fine an appeal, which they inevitably will.
and are in a hurricane zone.
The storm termed a hurricane in the Atlantic is called a cyclone in the Indian ocean and a typhoon in the pacific. So it is not a hurricane zone but a typhoon zone. Zing!
[Karma burning irrelevant piece of trivia brought to you by The Vocab Nazi]
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact