ie8 fix

Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King
Home / News & Blogs / Between the Lines

Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google

By | September 23, 2011, 9:08am PDT

Summary: Oracle has had trouble pinpointing an estimate of damages it claims to have incurred on Google’s part.

As settlement talks between Oracle and Google and their respective CEOs, Larry Ellison and Larry Page, proceeded to go nowhere, another key factor in Oracle’s case might finally be in place.

In July, both Oracle and Google were soundly scolded for different reasons before U.S. District Judge William Alsup. At the time, Oracle was asking for at least $6.1 billion in damages due to patent infringement claims related to the misuse of Java (which Oracle now owns after acquiring Sun Microsystems) on Android.

Additionally, Oracle wasn’t able to present which patents were actually violated, leaving their lawyers red-faced when the judge sternly turned them down and instructed them to do their homework.

Oracle has completed at least one assignment as it is asking now for $1.16 billion in damages. Reuters has the breakdown:

In a letter to Alsup, Oracle lawyer Steven Holtzman said the revised damages statement includes as much as $202 million for patent infringement, and as much as $960 million for copyright infringement.

That figure could be considered more reasonable, depending on how Oracle presents its case, which is expected to go to trial on Halloween. The prospect of a trial is looking ever more likely these days as settlement discussions over the last week and even last few months have proven to be futile.

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

More from “Between the Lines”

Topics

Damage, Google Inc., Oracle Corp., Rachel King

Rachel King is a staff writer for ZDNet based in San Francisco.

Disclosure

Rachel King

Rachel King has no business relationships, affiliations, investments, or other potential conflicts of interest relating to the content posted in this blog.

Biography

Rachel King

Rachel King is a staff writer for CBS Interactive in San Francisco. Before serving as a contributing editor at ZDNet in New York City for two years, she previously worked for The Business Insider, FastCompany.com, CNN's San Francisco bureau and the U.S. Department of State. Rachel has also written for MainStreet.com, Irish America Magazine and the New York Daily News, among others. Rachel has a B.A. in Mass Communications and History from the University of California, Berkeley and a M.S. in Journalism from Columbia University, where she served as art director for the student magazine, Plated.

28
Comments
Add Your Opinion

Join the conversation!

Just In

ladiqso 95 int
cdfwekrdfe70-24379039302851216005742393427879 25th Nov
pdxkqb,dqdgzmyy19, jtwhn.
View in thread
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
dsf3g 23rd Sep
$960 million for copyright infringement? Are they alleging Google lifted actual code?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
Darkninja962@... 23rd Sep
@dsf3g
Yeah, they are.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
JohnVoter 24th Sep
@dsf3g
Code which was never part of Android phones. Things like functional definitions, which by the way are not generally not subject to copyright because they are on the functional, not expressive end of the spectrum.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
THUFIR.HAWAT 5th Oct
@JohnVoter Err, you still can't take code which is copyrighted and just use it.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
brad1000 23rd Sep
dsf3g:

yes, Oracle is claiming Google used straight code, but I do not think that is the problem as much as it is the fact that Android uses a custom compiler that is incompatible with standard java, hence the copyright infringement.
If I have it right, Java is part of the free source group but as long as it is not altered. Microsoft was guilty of doing the same thing in windows and a judge forced them to use Sun's standard java compiler unaltered.
0 Votes
+ -
Re: Sun and "free"
ldo17 Updated - 24th Sep
@otaddy It has worked out quite well for others, like Red Hat, IBM, Google, HTC, Samsung, LG etc. It's not a magic recipe for success on its own, you still need to have some actual business savvy.
0 Votes
+ -
Well Sun was rather loose in the way it used the word "free"
otaddy 24th Sep
@ldo17 Jonathan pony tail thought "free" was the magic buzzword to profit and prosperity...and we all see how that plan worked out.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
JohnVoter 24th Sep
@brad1000
There is more than one issue of controversy here, but with regard to the Dalvik interpreter, it is not a case of Google modifying Java, but writing a new program which is Java byte code compatible. Which no more violates Oracle's rights than when Sun wrote Open Office to be compatible with Word documents.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
jhammackHTH 24th Sep
@JohnVoter You are absolutely wrong. Google absolutely violated patents and ripped off code, while changing just enough to think they could avoid having to license a patent. In fact, in Google's own emails they admit to patent infringement at the very least. It's time for Google to either license like most companies, or come up with their own code that doesn't steal from others. That's all they've done.

If you suggest that has been proven, why send Oracle and Google to the negotiating table, where Google would have to pay money. Google wouldn't have even bothered had they done nothing wrong.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
THUFIR.HAWAT 5th Oct
@JohnVoter Were Dalvik under the GPL, there would be no issue at all.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
THUFIR.HAWAT 14th Oct
@JohnVoter The accusation is that Google stripped the GPL from some .java files, modified them, and distributed them.
0 Votes
+ -
I think it is reasonable
brad1000 23rd Sep
I think paying 1.16 billion rather than the hassles and public PR mess it will create is not that bad.
0 Votes
+ -
I think they will end up paying
otaddy 24th Sep
@brad1000 Oracle doesnt want Android to die, it just wants in on the money.

So in the end, both Microsoft and Oracle will make money from Android.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
waterhzrd 24th Sep
@otaddy Along with everyone else trying to jump on the Android free money train.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
jhammackHTH 24th Sep
@otaddy This case has nothing to do with Microsoft. Microsoft's licensing deals have nothing to do with Java.
0 Votes
+ -
me no understand
phixit 23rd Sep
Lets avoid the entire issue with Java's compiler/interpreter not being the hottest thing and that Oracle probably has it inject random bits into the machine code just to piss people off enough to want to fix it... and then of course Oracle can finally sue them for trying to fix something they probably broke on purpose. Avoided? PSYCH!
Why does Oracle not want to promote their "free" product?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
THUFIR.HAWAT 5th Oct
@phixit It's free in the sense that you can modify, add, improve, distribute Java under the GPL. However, Dalvik is *not* GPL. That's rather the point.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
somereader Updated - 24th Sep
If all 37 API specifications files and the 12 code files would be found copyright protected, that would be 960/49, a little less than 20 million for every file.
Of course, Google will dispute that the API
files are protected by copyright, as it is the interface to Java used by many.
I suppose the 12 code files will be fixed.
If I could get 20 million for a code file, I would be rich.
I suppose, Google will also dispute that a such low percentage of the code could have that impact on their income, as is suggested also in Oracle's filing.
0 Votes
+ -
The question for Oracle
JohnVoter 24th Sep
@somereader
Why was it OK for Sun (now part of Oracle) to write a program that opens MS Word files?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
THUFIR.HAWAT 5th Oct
@JohnVoter It's not about compatibility. It's about taking copyrighted code, Java code, and removing the copyright boiler plate and then calling it your own. That's a copyright violation.

All Google had to do was to release Dalvik under the GPL and, voila!, no problem.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
basyoz 24th Sep
$960 million for copyright infringement?
Online radio - ?????????? ?????? ????????
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
THUFIR.HAWAT 14th Oct
@basyoz Exactly. If you don't want to do the time (in this case money, don't do the time). Sun released those files under the GPL, and used copyright to protect the code. All google had to do was to not remove the GPL from the .java files.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
THUFIR.HAWAT 24th Oct
@basyoz yes. it's like those cases where some mom gets a bill for $$$ for copying music. it's *per* infraction.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
Lord_of_the_Singhs 24th Sep
So what is the guarantee they won't revise it down to $200 million? I mean they came down almost 70%.

Guess my question is: Do they even have a case in the first place?
0 Votes
+ -
Yes they do have a case. The issue with the lowered amount of money
Mister Spock Updated - 25th Sep
@Lord_of_the_Singhs
is that a judge has the ability to change the amount of the award if they feel that Oracle is asking for money far in excess to what their actual loss was.

Much like a civil case in which a person seeks one billions dollars in restitution for the loss of a toe due to an accident.

The amount sought can be changed if deemed too excessive for the minimal impact that a missing toe would cause.

the same applies here, is the amount Oracle is asking really for that of loss of licensing fees, or are they trying to unfairly cripple Google by finacially draining them and adding to their own bank account?


plain
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Oracle wants $1.16 billion in damages from Google
Lord_of_the_Singhs 26th Sep
@Mister Spock : Hmm...My point is did Oracle just come up with a figure and was forced to work on the exact one later? Seems like the case.
0 Votes
+ -
reactions
somereader 25th Sep
With this article we may be landing closer to reality. But shouldn't it be pointed out that Oracle only mentions the gross revenue, and now waits for Google "to prove deductible expenses and the elements of profit attributable to factors other than the copyrighted work.??? (If any protected work is copied, it is a very small part of Android.)
I know this is a complex issue, but seeing some reactions, shouldn't somebody here write an article that at least gives a list of the issues with the most important arguments of both parties.
Is there a point in discussions if basic facts are not known?
0 Votes
+ -
ladiqso 95 int
cdfwekrdfe70-24379039302851216005742393427879 25th Nov
pdxkqb,dqdgzmyy19, jtwhn.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

Blog Roll

Blog Archive

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix