Oracle’s Future as Foretold in Oracle v Google

Judge Alsup has required Oracle to allow Google to depose five or Oracle’s engineers, one of whom is Hinkmond Wong who wrote in a blog,
“”For the other commenter who thinks Android is “based on Java”, you are incorrect. While it is true that the programming language for Android is the Java programming language, the Android platform itself uses the Dalvik virtual machine and processes Dalvik bytecode, not Java bytecode, so the Android platform is NOT based specifically on Java ME technology.

That is why the chart (above) from the Net Applications mobile analytics company, specifically calls out and differentiates “Java ME” from “Android” as two distinct Mobile/Tablet OSes, see the chart. Otherwise, if you think about it, why would they list the two different OSes in their Mobile/Tablet OS Share chart?””

The judge has heard similar things from Google’s lawyer but hearing it from an employee of Oracle cited in Oracle’s research paper on damages done to Oracle by Android/Linux is going to hurt. I like it. Oracle will have to impeach one of their own authorities or admit the lawsuit was a hollow sham. Cute.

see GROKLAW – Oracle v. Google – Oracle Engineer: Android Is Not Java ME!

Groklaw again lives up to its motto, When you want to know more but don’t know where to look.

If I were judge Alsup, I would entertain a motion for summary judgment in Google’s favour but the judge likely has to allow the jury to decide using this fact. He could open a door inviting Oracle to drop the case to save inevitable defeat… Even if the jury find for Oracle this fact has to gut the value due Oracle for any compensation. The issues of patent now come down to whether or not Dalvik violates the patents and this fact clearly shows it does not. A patent cannot prevent translation by an organiztion of an organization’s code to another language. Google did not write most of the code that runs on Android/Linux. Third parties did. Google only supplied the translating software.

Issues of copyright now come to the API, an abstraction which should not by copyright protectable or all Java applications would be in violation, a silly idea. Oracle’s whole lawsuit is silly. This proves it.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Oracle’s Future as Foretold in Oracle v Google

  1. Clarence Moon says:

    Clearly you are of a fixed mind in this matter, Mr. Pogson. My own emotional bent is toward Google’s case as well and I believe that the combined weight of copyright claims and patent litigation is an evil that retards the progress of science and industry in many fields, computer technology being just one of many.

    Many of these patents and copyright issues are like giving someone a patent on the head-first slide in a baseball game, depriving Pete Rose of his classic image. If someone can take an idea and be the best at executing it, then that someone should be allowed to prosper, even at the expense of someone who might have tried to do it first but who did not perfect it as well.

    I believe that such excellence should be the only thing that matters. If Samsung wants to try to tell the world that their tablet is just as good or even better than an iPad and that buyers can be just as popular with their peers using it as they can with a cool Apple product, then it should not matter one whit if the Galaxy tab looks a lot like an iPad to the unpracticed eye.

    I might draw the line at making unauthorized binary copies of program distribution media, but just maybe. Certainly it is not a copyright violation to make a work-alike such as Google’s version of java, nor should there be any sort of patent issue with the concepts involved. They are not inventions or discoveries at all, rather they are simply implementations of a logical solution to an obvious problem.

    On the other hand, there is a massive body of law, lawyers, and also judges who watch over and protect this sort of litigation. You have to see the practical side of things and suppose that both sides have some effective arguments that will affect the final decision. Judge Alsup has the ball and is not running with it the way that you suggest that he should based on your weighing of the evidence.

    If he shows irritation, it would be well to remember the fate of the judge in the Microsoft trial who was quite irritated himself, from all reports, and ended up being sent to the showers by the umpires on the appeals court after he let his irritation show too much.

  2. Clarence Moon wrote, “judge Alsup has not issued such rulings and seems content to continue to waste the court’s time and budget”.

    CM has, clearly, not read the judge’s rulings. They are full of irritation and impatience. Lately, he said in court,
    “THE COURT: I made a big mistake giving you this chance.
    I went to this conference, Mike Jacobs was there; I was thinking, how can we make these cases more simple? Everyone in the room, Judge Rader, everyone, they were talking, these damages reports are out of control, we got to do something about it. And so I’m thinking, okay, maybe a way to do that is to let the lawyers submit their reports in advance, and then I can say this is good, this is bad, that’s good, you know?

    Instead, I get a report that calls for 6 billion, not million, billion dollars. You are never going to do it again. I’m never going to let — the next time the lawyers are going to take the — gamble everything, one shot. And if they lose it, they don’t get a report. Just like Mr. Van Nest said, if you get greedy, it goes out the window, no more report, you just get an injunction, maybe.”

    see GROKLAW – Oracle v. Google – Still Waiting on the Revised Cockburn Report

    He did receive that report recently and called Oracle to account by ordering that Google could depose five techies who were named in the report, one of whom has blogged that Android/Linux does not use Java but Dalvik. Do you really believe the judge will now be snowed that this show should go on for years and amount to $billions in settlements? The judge has been educated about Oracle’s sneaky ways and will hold their feet to the fire to get them to hurry up. He let Oracle produce three drafts of the damages report and has stated that he will never do that again. He runs his court, not Oracle.

  3. Clarence Moon says:

    “If I were judge Alsup…”

    Focus on that thought, Mr. Pogson, it is what I myself do. On the one hand, there are legions of lawyers, admittedly on the Oracle payroll, who have advanced a theory of the case.

    Then there is the learned judge Alsup who, despite the continued pleading of lawyers opposed to that theory, continues to direct all of those lawyers to perform various tasks that they seem reluctant to complete and so rouse the occasional judicial ire of Alsup.

    Then there is your august self, who feels qualified to be competent legal counsel, judge, and jury, all rolled into one. I can appreciate the incredible efficiency offered by such a capability, but I would worry about the obvious lack of checks and balances.

    Then, too, it is telling that judge Alsup has not issued such rulings and seems content to continue to waste the court’s time and budget on such an open and shut matter.

    It just doesn’t add up.

Leave a Reply