Oracle CFO: We never wanted this lawsuit with Google

Oracle CFO: We never wanted this lawsuit with Google

Summary: Oracle's Safra Catz tries to refute Google's claims that Oracle initiated the lawsuit because it couldn't compete in the mobile OS market.

SHARE:

SAN FRANCISCO -- Oracle chief financial officer and president Safra Catz made an appearance on the stand at the U.S. District Court on Friday morning, testifying for Oracle's rebuttal case in its intellectual property trial against Google.

See alsoOracle: Google wanted easy route to Android revenue with Java

After Judge William Alsup asked at one point during the plaintiff's questioning why Catz was called, Oracle counsel Fred Norton said that it was to prove that Oracle wasn't suing Google because it couldn't compete in the mobile market.

Despite an objection from Google counsel Christa Anderson, Judge Alsup overruled the motion, instructing the jury that the motives here are "irrelevant," and what matters here are both parties' legal rights.

Norton started by asking Catz if she was familiar with the Apache Harmony project and asked if Oracle ever used or contributed to the open source project.

Catz replied that Oracle never supplied any financial or technical resources, nor did Oracle ever consider it.

"We didn't need to as we had our own independent implementation, and we had a license from Sun," Catz added.

Furthermore, Catz said that Oracle reached out to Google "a number of times" after the Sun Microsystems acquisition in January 2010 to "get this matter resolved."

"We never wanted to be in this litigation with Google," Catz said.

Catz noted that she had been in at least four meetings to resolve its issues with Google out of court, describing that Oracle had two objectives: Make Android compatible with the Java community as well as get Android licensed for Java and paying for the intellectual property.

Norton highlighted an email conversion from Google's Alan Eustace to Catz on June 28, 2010, which included the following excerpt:

We will not pay for code that we are not using, or license IP that we strongly believe we are not violating, and that you refuse to enumerate. Google engineers spent considerable time and effort building from scratch open source alternative to closed systems.

Norton asked Catz if Oracle took any further steps to resolve the dispute with Google after this email, and if those conversations were successful.

Catz answered that that she thought there were a few more attempts, but obviously they weren't successful.

"No, that's why we're here," Catz added.

Upon cross-examination, Catz acknowledged that she had no personal knowledge of what Sun told Google prior to acquisition.

In line with the more personal questioning similar to what was seen during Schwartz's testimony on Thursday, Anderson asked Catz how many shares she has at Oracle.

Catz admitted that she has roughly $18 million in shares, adding that she is "truly the American dream."

But when asked if the only person with more Oracle shares than her was CEO Larry Ellison, Catz was a bit confused, saying that as far as employees go, that might be true but that there are "a number of a folks" on a personal basis with more shares.

Correction: This post has been revised as it previously incorrectly listed Oracle's counsel as Marc David Peters.

Related:

Topics: Mobility, Hardware, Mobile OS, Oracle, Security, Smartphones

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

10 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Judge is right

    Motives do not matter nor does Oracles stupidity. The law does matter and Oracle will come up short due to de minimus, no proof of ownership of the 37 and no infringement due to clean room. Fine give em the mistake of rangeCheck() 9 lines. Next.
    droidfromsd
  • Of course they didn't want litigation

    they were hoping G would just bend over. They had/have no case, but were hoping to intimidate G into paying for nothing...kind of like M$ does.
    timspublic1@...
  • Queue the violin music.

    Otherwise known as a 'shakedown'.
    DTS, Your Linux Advocate
  • right!!!

    Elli$on won't shake down people! LOL
    Oracle will lose an all counts!
    The Linux Geek
  • Y @ O @ U... M @ U @ S @ T.... S @ E @ E!!!!!!

    like Jack said I am dazzled that any body able to make $5766 in 1 month on the computer. did you see this web link <b>http://tomakeusd.blogspot.in/<b>
    Alissa242
  • Talk about stating the obvious...

    Of course they didn't want the lawsuit. The legal costs as astronomical and they know they have no chance to win. They just wanted Google to settle and pay up a billion.

    http://www.tech-thoughts.net/
    sameer_singh17
    • The conclusion of your linked article

      Looks less likely now that Oracle has dropped the 3rd party portion of the lawsuit today 043012 and will conceivably lose the rest.
      droidfromsd
  • We never wanted this lawsuit with Google...

    ...We just wanted them to pay us billions and shut up! Damn Google who took us to court!
    Lord_of_the_Singhs
  • reply

    If you are looking for Applebees coupons then visit http://bestapplebeescoupons.org. Also if you like to about bed bath and beyond coupons then visit http://bestbedbathandbeyondcoupons.com. If you want to know about toilet paper coupons then http://besttoiletpapercoupons.com. Information about red lobster coupons can be found at http://bestredlobstercoupons.org. Lastly if you love yoplait coupons then http://yoplaitcouponsprintable.org and get the benefits of greek yogurt from http://greek-yogurt-benefits.com tatar
    techrahul
  • replay

    http://www.delegnt.net/vb/
    http://online.n99m.com/
    http://ar.n55m.com/
    http://ar.m55n.com/
    http://www.n99m.com/
    http://short.delegnt.net/
    http://games.n99m.com/
    http://www.animevb.com/
    http://www.software.delegnt.net/
    http://www.delegnt.net/
    abumajednet