Oracle Says Trial Wasn't Fair, It Should Have Known About Google Play For Chrome (arstechnica.com)

Two and a half months after a federal jury concluded that Google's Android operating system does not infringe Oracle-owned copyrights because its re-implementation of 37 Java APIs is protected by "fair use," Oracle's attorney says her client missed a crucial detail in the trial, adding that this detail could change everything. ArsTechnica reports: Oracle lawyers argued in federal court today that their copyright trial loss against Google should be thrown out because they were denied key evidence in discovery. Oracle attorney Annette Hurst said that the launch of Google Play on Chrome OS, which happened in the middle of the trial, showed that Google was trying to break into the market for Java SE on desktops. In her view, that move dramatically changes the amount of market harm that Oracle experienced, and the evidence should have been shared with the jury. "This is a game-changer," Hurst told U.S. District Judge William Alsup, who oversaw the trial. "The whole foundation for their case is gone. [Android] isn't 'transformative'; it's on desktops and laptops." Google argued that its use of Java APIs was "fair use" for several reasons, including the fact that Android, which was built for smartphones, didn't compete with Java SE, which is used on desktops and laptops. During the post-trial hearing today, Hurst argued that it's clear that Google intends to use Android smartphones as a "leading wedge" and has plans to "suck in the entire Java SE market. [...] Android is doing this using Java code," said Hurst. "That's outrageous, under copyright law. This verdict is tainted by the jury's inability to hear this evidence. Viewing the smartphone in isolation is a Google-gerrymandered story."In the meanwhile, Google attorney said Oracle was aware of Google's intentions of porting Android to laptops and desktops, and that if Oracle wanted to use this piece of information, it could have.

Comments

$23

[Austerity Empowers]

Here is the smallest violin I could find on short notice. Hopefully if enough of us play, it will drown out Oracle's wailing.

Re:$23

[BarbaraHudson]

Pretty stupid because Android phones don't run any version of Java, and even if they were going after Java ME's market, there's nothing wrong with going after someone else's market. Agreements not to do so are illegal because they are anti-trust violations. Besides, Java ME was not for the desktop market, that was Java SE.

Now if you want to run Java on, say, a Chromebook, you have to actually install Java, as described here, and it will run Java for linux.

This is just lawyers running the meter.

Re:$23

[phantomfive]

It was a beautiful day in court if you like courtroom drama. Some of the dialogue:

[Oracle attorney]Hurst throws her hands up. "It’s a fraud on the jury! It’s a mockery of the system!"

Google attorney responded by saying that Oracle already tried to bring ARC and other products into it, and that the court struck testimony about these products, because this limited retrial was frozen in time, looking at what was available in 2012.

Judge ALSUP to Google: "Do you concede that Oracle is entitled to bring a new lawsuit against any new product that was not in the first trial?"

Google: "YES"

ORACLE: "We certainly can sue, but that’s not why this verdict should be set aside."

later

(Flashback: key argument in the case was that Android did not compete with Java SE because it was not for desktop.)
Hurst throws up arms again and starts shouting, "This is outrageous! They’re lying to the jury!" (because Android on Chromebooks)

Judge ALSUP [trolling]: "We already said we’re going to have another trial on all of those other products."

Judge ALSUP: "Do you know how many Social Security claimants I can't rule on right now because you're arguing over a cost bill?"

source

Re:$23

[jabuzz]

The difference is that Microsoft took the Sun Java implementation and modified which broke the terms of the license they had from Sun for access to the source code.

Google just looked at the specification for the Java language, wrote their own compiler which produced a completely different bytecode (its register based as opposed to the stack based byte code of Java) and then wrote a virtual machine for that bytecode. Later they ditched the virtual machine and now compile the byetcode to native machine code when you install the application.

Re:Get over it

[Archangel Michael]

Google Play for Chrome, is about porting Android Apps to run as apps under Chrome (think Chromebooks).

IMHO the wheres and the whatfors don't really change anything. Either Google can use their re-engineered APIs or they can't. The court ruled ... they can.

Nah

[Njorthbiatr]

You should be paying Google for keeping Java alive and interest in it high. If anything they make you money. A lot of it.

So go fuck yourself Oracle. You and your dying platform.

Re:Nah

[aralin]

I don't think you quite understand this case. Oracle is trying to utterly and thoroughly to lose this case, but to litigate it in every single possible angle. They are trying to do the same thing Google did to them to Amazon in the Cloud and they want to make sure that there is an ironclad precedent. Oracle even hired a team of former Amazon people to do a reimplementation of AWS API for them.

This case is not about Java at all. In fact it is going to hugely benefit both Oracle and Google. But oh well, keep your emotions high if you like.

Google obviously could have made Android..

[JMZero]

..without Java, easily, and I'm sure now they wish they had. They've learned their lesson, and everyone should learn the same lesson from this case: "avoid Oracle, avoid Java".

Oracle is a snake that will bite you as soon as it feels hungry or threatened in any way. Java is no longer a free standard with tools that'll bootstrap your project and help you inter-operate, now it's a Trojan horse that could spill open and burn your business, or at very least can be yanked out from under you at any time (if you aren't willing to pay up or hire good lawyers).

Re:Google obviously could have made Android..

[a_n_d_e_r_s]

Oracle did not own Java when Google made android. Oracle bought Java later.

Old owner of Java - Sun - had no problem with google.

So problems are with proprietary software. New owners - new rules - new problems.

Incompetent counsel

[tomhath]

Oracle is claiming their lawyer was so incompetent that the wrong verdict was reached.

So now the judge is supposed to believe that same lawyer when she suggests that Oracle should have a new trial.

Sure.

Re:Unbreakable

[arth1]

Remember when Oracle was a software vendor rather than an IP troll?

Um, no? Was that back when they were RSI?

From the start, Oracle's model appears to have been centered on IP trolling their own customers, making them pay for strange things like potential users and counting data collection devices as users (along with any human who ever touches said devices).

Re:Get over it

[Anonymous Coward]

The API argument has been through the courts many times. The was wrangling over alternate BIOS implementations when clones of the original IBM PC appeared. API based, clean room developed BIOSs are fully accepted now. The not so distant SCO / Unix lawsuit went through similar arguments and got nowhere trying to claim header copyrights. Oracle's complaint, from the limited amount I have read, seems awfully twisted and warped, or maybe technical would be a better description. From a distance it seems like bullshit and up close the smell does not get any better.

Oracle's legal team must be aware of the dismal prospects for success so what is really driving this? Crazy Oracle CEO? Overreaching law firm salivating over more billable time? Were they all hoping to luck out with an idiot jury or ignorant judges?

I wonder how long it will take to kill this case completely.

Re:Newsflash: Lawyer intentionally misrepresents..

[Dutch Gun]

or disbarred for being a majorly disingenuous douchebag and outright lying.

So, she should be disbarred for being a lawyer?

Sue, sue, sue..

[h8sg8s]

Larry would rather sue for imagined damages than compete in the market. Lawyers are better bang/buck than engineers, at least in his thinking.

Re:Get over it

[vux984]

IMHO the wheres and the whatfors don't really change anything. Either Google can use their re-engineered APIs or they can't. The court ruled ... they can.

I'm not siding with Oracle, but...

Just from reading the summary, it sounds like google made a fair-use defense.

And in a fair use defense the 'where and whatfors' you raise in your justfication for why its fair use absolutely matter.

Either Google can use their re-engineered APIs or they can't. The court ruled ... they can.

Lets say you format shifted your own personal cassette tapes to CD, for your own personal use. Then the music industry freaks out and comes after you... you make a fair use defense...

  you are only doing it for music you already own
  to convert it to a format you prefer to use
  yada yada yada.
  and you win the case

Then after the case ends, the music industry discovers that half way through the trial you started selling 'format shifting services' commercially...

This really is a whole other thing. You can't say "Either you can format shift, or you can't. The court ruled you can". The court ruled you can do it with music you own for your own use. They didn't rule you could do it as a commercial service for other people... that's potentially a whole new trial.

Similarly google, *as part of its defense*, claimed that it's implementation didn't compete with Oracle on the desktop. Then it launched a version that does run on the desktop.

Google should still win (IMO). But Oracle has a valid argument that that piece of the defense is no longer valid, and theoretically could change the outcome.

Kick Oracle right in their cash-cow

[Tablizer]

Google should purchase the PostgreSql organization, improve the database's compatibility with Oracle, improve the documentation, and stick links to it everywhere. If anybody googles with "Oracle" in the search phrase, include a link to PostgreSql in their ads.

Re:Boo Fucking Hoo

[Tablizer]

"Oracle" another government created monstrosity out to screw the people no matter what!

Government-created? No. Private org.

If you mean many of their customers are gov't entities, you are correct.

Oracle's RDBMS was actually revolutionary when it came out. Before that you had difficult-to-use DB's such as IMS and CODASYL's pasta-like children.

SQL is not perfect, but it was a big step up. SQL was invented/defined by IBM, but they dragged their feet on in it, fearing it would hurt their IMS cash cow. Oracle released the first commercial RDBMS, and it was a hit because the alternatives sucked.

You have to give them credit for that, even though they are slimy with regard to lawyers and sales gimmicks.

Copyright troll company

[XSportSeeker]

Are we to expect whinning everytime Google uses Android for something good now?

And are you really complaining that Android for Chrome OS of all things is trying to compete with Java SE? HA! Man, what a joke.

Your famously insecure platform that you kept spending money to falsely advertise as secure, while not patching it as you should, to the point you had to be sued by the FTC to come clean about it?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

Fuck you Oracle. Even if your case had any hint of truth to it, you have no right to complain.
There is nothing better for the public than competition to a company as irresponsible as yours.

I wanna see they going back to the courts to get owned once again... pretty clear that there are some delusional people in charge of the legal team there.

Java on the desktop?

[Rexdude]

Google was trying to break into the market for Java SE on desktops

What 'market for Java SE on the desktop'? Applets were dead in the water after Flash was launched...some 18-20 years ago. Java has only ever been used to run application servers since then, there is no killer app for the desktop that had people wilfully downloading the JRE in droves. Alternately, I'd love for Oracle to point me to the humungous list of Java based desktop applications that Android is supposedly taking over.