Google staves off Oracle code copyright claim
Putting an end to a contentious trial, a jury on Thursday found that Google's implementation of 37 Java APIs in Android represented fair use -- rebuffing complaints by Java's nominal owner, Oracle.
A Google spokesperson called the ruling a "win for the Android ecosystem, for the Java programming community, and for software developers who rely on open and free programming languages to build innovative consumer products," according to TechCrunch. While Oracle sometimes licenses Java for commercial products, Google argued that it was exempt under fair use terms, because it transformed the code into a new product -- in this case, Android.
Oracle has already indicated it will file an appeal in the case, which dates back to 2010. "We strongly believe that Google developed Android by illegally copying core Java technology to rush into the mobile device market," said Oracle general counsel Dorian Daley.
A decision in Oracle's favor could potentially have deterred developers from tapping into third-party programming languages, something that's common practice. At the same time, some developers do rely on licensing APIs for income, necessitating protection.
Apple also famously claimed that Google stole to create Android, which resulted in a flurry of patent lawsuits, primarily against Samsung, its main competition in the phone and tablet space. These battles have largely been resolved, but the U.S. Supreme Court should soon hear a Samsung appeal of a $548 million verdict in Apple's favor. Samsung is looking to reduce the amount of money it may owe.
A Google spokesperson called the ruling a "win for the Android ecosystem, for the Java programming community, and for software developers who rely on open and free programming languages to build innovative consumer products," according to TechCrunch. While Oracle sometimes licenses Java for commercial products, Google argued that it was exempt under fair use terms, because it transformed the code into a new product -- in this case, Android.
Oracle has already indicated it will file an appeal in the case, which dates back to 2010. "We strongly believe that Google developed Android by illegally copying core Java technology to rush into the mobile device market," said Oracle general counsel Dorian Daley.
A decision in Oracle's favor could potentially have deterred developers from tapping into third-party programming languages, something that's common practice. At the same time, some developers do rely on licensing APIs for income, necessitating protection.
Apple also famously claimed that Google stole to create Android, which resulted in a flurry of patent lawsuits, primarily against Samsung, its main competition in the phone and tablet space. These battles have largely been resolved, but the U.S. Supreme Court should soon hear a Samsung appeal of a $548 million verdict in Apple's favor. Samsung is looking to reduce the amount of money it may owe.
Comments
Damn shame, really.
Oracle will have to appeal again (and win again) before this gets settled.
Oh but Apple took it from BSD you say. So what? Google took theirs from Apache Harmony, another BSD style licensed software.
You really want Apple having to fight off a potential jury since APIs are being infringed?
They can copy, steal and rape other products, and what's the worst that will happen? They get sued? Big freakin' deal. By the time that the court cases are decided, many years will have passed, and the products that they've stolen are no longer current, and they'll have pocketed an enormous amount of profit. Just look at all of the iPhone copying that Samsung has done.
If any and all methods are acceptable, then it would be hilarious if some new company comes along that has even worse morals than Google and Samsung, and that company employs methods such as arson, industrial espionage and even the occasional assassination. As long as they are able to hide their crimes, then what's the problem? All's fair in love & war & business too.
However, the core people at Google know damn well what they did is shady. They needed to quickly get a software development environment for Android, and instead of going with something truly open and spending the time/resources in polishing it for commercial use (as NeXT/Apple did with Objective-C), or licensing it from someone, they simply "cloned-and-owned" Java. They took advantage of the investment Sun had made in creating, refining, and popularizing Java amongst developers, without paying them a dime in licensing fees (as other companies were doing). In turn, killing the core business model for Java.
Sorry, but anyone who works in tech and doesn't see that as a sleazy, bad-for-the-industry, dick move deserves to lose their job/business to a knock-off company.
Of course, Sun and now Oracle, have thing thing called openjdk which has those same api's on a GPL and a classpath exemption, so really, Oracle has no rightful reason to be angry with someone "stealing" Java when they give it away themselves!
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/why-the-very-silly-oracle-v-google-trial-actually-matters
Trust me, you don't want it any other way. Apple is currently fighting patent trolls that past rulings by the CAFC made possible. You know, trolls like VirnetX.
If the case went to the 9th circuit, past decisions were in favor of using apis. It only went to the CAFC due to a patent dispute, even though not appealed.
Sure Sun/Oracle has been confused about where they wanted to take Java, but it's still their choice to make whether someone is allowed to bundle it with their technology or not. At the time, mobile platform creators had to pay a licensing fee for it. Google decided not to and took a legally grey route to do it. Just because they can't be pinned down by any particular copyright law doesn't mean that people in the tech industry should applaud them for anything.