Read
- British Prime Minister seeks answers after soldier hacked to death
|
- Global shares sink on U.S. stimulus pullback, Chinese growth fears
- RPT-Ford to close Australia auto plants
- British soldier hacked to death in suspected Islamist attack
- China factory activity shrinks for first time in seven months: flash PMI
|
Reuters Photojournalism
Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography. See more | Photo caption
Message of humility
A religious fraternity in Rio considers the election of Pope Francis, a confirmation of their beliefs in poverty and simplicity. Slideshow
Sponsored Links
Oracle suffers major setback in Google case
The company logo is shown at the headquarters of Oracle Corporation in Redwood City, California February 2, 2010.
Credit: Reuters/Robert Galbraith
SAN FRANCISCO |
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A U.S. judge dismissed Oracle Corp's copyright claims against Google Inc for parts of the Java programming language, knocking out Oracle's prime vehicle for damages in a high stakes legal battle over smartphones.
The ruling on Thursday from a San Francisco federal judge is the latest blow to Oracle in its lawsuit against Google. It is one of several intellectual property cases between tech giants over smartphones and tablets using Google's Android operating system.
Apple is scheduled for trial in U.S. courts against Google's Motorola Mobility unit in June, and against Samsung in July. However, Oracle's lawsuit against Google, filed in 2010, was the first in the smartphone wars to go before a jury.
The case examined whether computer language that connects programs and operating systems - known as application programming interfaces, or APIs - can be copyrighted. In a trial that began last month, Oracle claimed Google's Android tramples on its rights to the structure of 37 Java APIs.
Google argued it did not violate Oracle's patents and that Oracle cannot copyright APIs for Java, an open-source or publicly available software language. Android is the best-selling smartphone operating system around the world.
Oracle sought roughly $1 billion on its copyright claims, but the jury deadlocked on a key copyright issue. They then found that Google did not infringe two of Oracle's patents, which ended the trial last week before damages could be considered.
Meanwhile, U.S. District Judge William Alsup had deferred a legal ruling on the ability to copyright 37 Java APIs until after the trial.
His ruling on Thursday likely eliminates the ability of Oracle to seek an immediate retrial against Google in San Francisco federal court.
Oracle spokeswoman Deborah Hellinger said the company will "vigorously appeal" Alsup's order. "This ruling, if permitted to stand, would undermine the protection for innovation and invention in the United States," Hellinger wrote in an email.
Alsup's written order does not address whether all Java APIs are free to use without a license - or whether the structure of any computer program may be stolen.
"Rather, it holds on the specific facts of this case, the particular elements replicated by Google were free for all to use," Alsup wrote.
Google spokesman Jim Prosser said the decision upholds the principle that open computer languages are essential for software development.
"It's a good day for collaboration and innovation," Prosser said.
The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California is Oracle America, Inc v. Google Inc, 10-3561.
(Reporting By Dan Levine; Editing by Gary Hill, Matthew Lewis and Phil Berlowitz)
- Tweet this
- Link this
- Share this
- Digg this
- Reprints
> Alsup’s written order does not address whether all
> Java APIs are free to use without a license – or whether
> the structure of any computer program may be stolen.
> Rather, it holds on the specific facts of this case, the
> particular elements replicated by Google were free for all
> to use,” Alsup wrote.
>
> Google spokesman Jim Prosser said the decision upholds the
> principle that open computer languages are essential for
> software development.
>
Either I don’t understand the phrase “does not address” or there’s an important part of the ruling missing from this article.
This part of the decision upholds that the elements in question were open. In refusing to rule on APIs not mentioned in the case, it upholds that the possibility for proprietary code and need to protect it are both real.
That says nothing to claim open code is needed nor debunk millions of software applications developed using non-open computer languages with paid or unpaid permission. You don’t need open coded objects to develop; you need license to use any code you wish to use. So that license happens to be open to the public for some code, but you can still work with other code if you do the right thing to get the permission you need. This preserves the need to be careful with any tool you use to protect the value of that too.
I like what Google does and hope they keep on doing great works with open code.
I also don’t mind Oracle getting paid fair dues for what they write, but it seems the vast majority of Java whether touched by Sun, Microsoft, or Tom Smith was based in the roots of open-ness. They all turn a blind eye on thousands of open developments. It’s sad to see anyone build up their name for having a hand in making open platforms possible and then try to profit from a few who use any open platform more successfully than those they ignore.
I must stress that’s only my opinion and the article above states the court expressly refused to rule on whether some other Java APIs as modified by Oracle might be Oracle Property. It’s prudent for the court to not make snap judgments without evidence, but that leaves Oracle room to wait around for someone to make good before claiming another API is Oracle property.
Follow Reuters