Team Android

U.S. District Judge William Alsup made a key decision on Thursday in the Google v. Oracle case. He dismissed Oracle's claims that the APIs that Google used were copyrightable.

Just last week, a jury found that Google did not infringe on Oracle's patents, which was a big win in itself. The copyright claims were one of the key issues though as Oracle was seeking $1 Billion dollars from the software giant for 37 Java APIs. Oracle has predictable promised to be appeal, but it looks like they've all but lost at this point.

This is a big win for Google, but as we've said before, it's a shame that these trials have to happen in the first place. Millions of dollars will continue to be poured into legal fees until the software patent issue is resolved.

Source: The Guardian

 

Reader comments

Another huge win for Google as judge throws out the copyright claims by Oracle

15 Comments

Remember that Apple doesn't have the balls to go after Google. They go after all of the OEM partners that don't have the cash to finance large, drawn-out trials and instead pay for a licensing deal. MS does the same thing, and successfully so. Not only are they stifling innovation, they are cowards.

This is far bigger than most people think.

As the Judge himself indicated, no court has visited this issue before, so contrary to all the claims by Oracle and Microsoft, and all the other big time players who were predicting the doom of Android, this ruling puts the issue to rest. This now becomes the definitive case law.

And NOT just for Android, but ALL programming languages, APIs, whether locally installed, or made available over the internet. As was patently (sorry) obvious to any programmer, APIs were meant to be non-copyrightable. How else could they possibly be used to interface to the software in question? And EU authorities have already weighed in on this matter. Point settled.

PJ (Groklaw) Sums it up very nicely.

Let's not get carried away here. One district court ruling does not make "definitive case law." This ruling isn't binding on anyone but the parties to this case. It can be influential or persuasive if the same issue arises in other cases, but this doesn't even bind future similar cases in the same court.

Actually you are both right. This decision doesn't effectively become binding case law. But it sets a precedent now. Federal precedents are damn near impossible to reverse once ruled. The effect this can have is now virtually any challenge to a supposed software patent can be called for judicial review. Companies that have deep portfolios are now subject to no less than Oracle by having their claims dismissed & their patents declared invalid.

Microsoft & Apple should be very nervous about this. Their litigate first strategy, in particular Apples, can jeopardize their claims to anything.

This is all moot if Oracle asks for an appeal, it is granted, and then Oracle wins the appeal. If that happens (and it very easily could) we are back at square one.

If it happens, Oracle would have to be crazy to try that, they have more to lose than gain, and, as stated above, it would be very hard to make the case that APIs were copyrightable since THERE IS NO PRIOR CASE LAW upon which to base such an appeal.

Go read what some experts are saying about this. Nobody expects them to even try an appeal of the API copyright issue, and everybody expects them to lose such an appeal if they try. The courts can see which way the wind is blowing, the EU has already ruled the same way, and this Judge IS the resident expert on this type of thing.

" Oracle has predictable promised to be appeal..." Holy crap man! Can we have some proofreading please???

No proofreading allowed on the internet. It would take precious time away from making sh*t up.