Google wins again vs. Oracle: No patent probs.

In the case of Oracle v Google, the latter has prevailed -- at least, as far as the jury is concerned. There was no Java patent infringement in Android, said the men and women who performed the service. Now we wait to find out if APIs are even copyrightable at all. In IT Blogwatch, bloggers go back for second-helpings of popcorn.  

By Richi Jennings: Your humble blogwatcher curated these bloggy bits for your entertainment. Not to mention: iQuad Revolution Kite Team...

James Niccolai reports:

The jury rendered its verdict Wednesday that Google had not infringed either of the two Java-related patents. ... With the jury split over the earlier copyright question, there were no damages for them to decide.

...

[The] jury agreed that Google infringed Oracle's copyrights by copying 37 Java APIs. ... But they couldn't agree whether that infringement was protected by fair use.

...

The judge...has still to make an important ruling on whether...APIs can be copyrighted at all. ... [He] could issue his ruling next week. ... Whatever happens next, Oracle has emerged from this trial with much less than it hoped for.   
M0RE

Ginny LaRoe adds:

Google Inc. took home a defense verdict...after a jury rejected all claims of patent infringement. ... Oracle, which once touted the whole case as worth $6 billion or more, could walk away with nothing but legal bills.

...

The possibility of a retrial looms on the main copyright infringement question...[but if Judge Alsup] finds it's not copyrightable...then Google wouldn't face retrial on that claim. ... Alsup said he will rule on copyrightability next week.   
M0RE

Paralegal Pamela Jones discovers how the jury wasn't unanimous and goes on to criticize Florian "FOSSpatents" Müller:

We also learn that in the copyright phase, it was 9 to 3 for Google on fair use. ... In short, Oracle has lost big time so far.

...

[T]hink about those $6 billion damages headlines. ... Was it an accurate tip? Remember all those articles about Google...[having] no patents to use in a counterclaim? ... Was it an accurate analysis? ... If someone is being paid by a party to litigation, what is he likely to say?   
M0RE

So what does Florian "Oracle consultant" Müller have to say for himself:

[The] copyright liability issues identified thus far will be postponed. ... [The] judge said that whoever loses will have to appeal...well aware of the fact that some of these issues are controversial.

...

A jury trial on patent infringement is a lottery. ... Google was very lucky...that this is a jury that erred in Google's favor...very defendant-friendly.   
M0RE

Meanwhile, James "father of Java" Gosling isn't happy with "Google's callous self-righteousness":

Despite all the furor that went into this one, it went out with a wimper. ... For those of us at Sun who felt trampled-on and abused by Google...I would have preferred a different outcome - not from the court case as much as from events of years past.   
M0RE

To which, Pete Austin retorts:

You would prefer that APIs are copyrightable? And don't you see that this case has hugely damaged Java?   
M0RE

   

And Finally...

iQuad Revolution Kite Team, Grand Haven, MI

[hat tip: Monkey Doo]

 
Don't miss out on IT Blogwatch:

Richi Jennings, your humble blogwatcher

Richi Jennings is an independent analyst/consultant, specializing in blogging, email, and security. He's the creator and main author of Computerworld's IT Blogwatch, for which he has won ASBPE and Neal awards. He also writes The Long View for IDG Enterprise. A cross-functional IT geek since 1985, you can read Richi's full profile and disclosure of his industry affiliations.

Copyright © 2012 IDG Communications, Inc.

Shop Tech Products at Amazon