Oracle's opening statement vs. Google: 91 slides

Oracle's opening statement vs. Google: 91 slides

Summary: Arguing that "Android is not a clean room implementation," Oracle said that Google copied Java code.


Oracle kicked off its Java patent and copyright lawsuit against Google and its Android mobile operating system with a 91 page slide deck.

The presentation, which was provided by Oracle as a link ahead of opening statements, outlines the company's lawsuit over Android. Oracle's argument is that Android is a rip-off of Java and it wants compensation and damages.

For those paying attention to Oracle lawsuits---notably the TomorrowNow case vs. SAP---the presentation sounds familiar. Oracle goes for the jugular.

More: Oracle, Google CEOs lined up as witnesses in Android IP trialOracle v. Google: What's at stake

Oracle makes extensive use of email excerpts in the presentation and quotes Google executives arguing that they need to work around Java or plow through it and worry about the consequences later. Arguing that "Android is not a clean room implementation," Oracle said that Google copied Java code. In addition, Oracle argued that Google harmed the Java community by fragmenting the code with Android.

Here are a few of the slides Oracle uses to make its case:

Topics: Android, Smartphones, Security, Oracle, Open Source, Mobility, Mobile OS, Hardware, Google, Software Development

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


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Oracle lies, lies,lies!

    These are outrageous allegations that will be refuted at trial and all the quotes will be proven to be out of context. Oracle is grasping at straws while everyone knows by now that this is a frivolous lawsuit where Oracle is trying to make people pay for FOSS.
    The community will not allow such a money grab to happen and the people will not be let down!
    The Linux Geek
  • strong??

    Does not look as a very strong case, does it? Copy java API, as everybody else is supposed to do. 4 lines of code are shown, to short to have a real meaning. And two patents shown, the rests of the six that did not even survive completely?
    • This is not the point; both APIs and code are copyrighted and *all* of ...

      Google bosses understood it right from the beginning, as court records show.
      • *all*

        Some API texts were labelledwith a copyright sign. I am not a lawyer but I read this does is not enough to legally protected by copyright.
        But what do you mean, not the point? Before coming with a plot theory you need some illegal actions otherwise you have found a plot to do noting.
      • Yes, all Google's bosses understood that what they were doing it illegal

        @somereader: they were discussing licensing many times, but never did it, and later decided to just use Sun's IP without licensing.
  • google copied java, period.

    Everybody in the tech industry knows that google ripped off java and created android. Sun and google may have been 'friends' at that time, but it has no legal validity. google knowingly did the code stealing.

    This trial is all about how much google should pay as damages.
    • Where are your facts?

      You forgot facts to back up your allegations. Reverse engineering is LEGAL in the USA.

      The trial is about whether Oracle can prove their case to a non-technical jury or not.
    • rip off

      Yes, give a list of copied documents they took during that big rip off. I understand that Encyclopdia Britannica had in some edition some 40 million words and red that Android had in May 2010 some 12 million lines, some 56000 files.
      So if you could make a list and send it to the Oracle legal team, I think they would be happy, because they are probably still looking and until now only found a few lines in a few files, not really part of what makes Android running, but something to do with a test procedure. And admitted something like that yesterday to the jury. And yes, some API descriptions, but of course they are meant to be used by external party's.
  • Did everyone forget?

    Has everyone forgotten Ellison sat on Apple's board? I would not be surprised to find out this was another prong in the iOS vs Android fight.
    Madwolf Software
    • Yeah so did Eric Schmidt. Just shows apple has bad taste in board members.

      For god's sake they have Al Gore, how much worse can they get.
      Johnny Vegas
      • The reasons they left are telling

        True, but the interesting bit is in the resignation letters. Ellison resigned in 2002 because he didn't have time to attend the board meetings. Schmidts was because Google was entering more and more of Apple's core business and the telling part is "Therefore, we have mutually decided that now is the right time for Eric to resign his position on Apple???s Board.???
        Madwolf Software
  • Android infrastructure most likely would belong to Oracle

    I am UI developer for years. And I must say that developing stable usable API takes years of iterations and attributes and methods deprecation. Maintaining backward compatibility for public APIs is super complex and expensive task in terms of unnecessary code maintenance and compatibility verification. So the fact that Google reused SUN's Java API says for itself. They saved tons of time and money.
    Google was stupid enough to not purchase SUN when they had a chance, instead they purchased Motorola Mobility. Larry Ellison is still business super star, so my respect to Oracle and this lawsuit.

    Android infrastructure most likely would go to Oracle as a result of this Lawsuit. Google has no chance to save it. Proportion of Java value in Android outweighs any existing Motorola patents.

    So Google would continue developing its Chrome OS and push HTML5 forward in order to save its search engine out of obsolescence. And all other regular companies would continue development of native frameworks for their private Application Stores.

    • so

      Your comments are nothing more than your opinion. No facts, just your take on things.
      • yes, and he gives credentials

        The *only* useful thing about Android is the app store, which, gasp, uses Java. Or, rather, not-Java, Dalvik, which is, well, the point both of the lawsuit and of the post you replied to.
  • Android is built on bastardized Java, top to bottom

    I have coded in Java for about 10 years now, and I have experimented extensively with Android code as well. I was amazed to find that Google had not licensed Java for Android. Without Java, there is no Android.
    roger that
  • lrd555

    OMG! This one's too easy. Oracle's going to win this one hands down.
    $2 Billion plus recurring yearly revenues.
  • What kind of comparison is this?

    When learning programming, there are certain constructs and even variable names that are inculcated at such an early stage that ceratin things are 'standard'. It is for this reason that the precious few lines of code (above) being similar/identical does not surprise me.
    • it's totallity

      to say that C# is a Java rip-off is true, but probably, even Sun had had the cajones, nothing they could do about it. However, when you copy-paste code, you've crossed a line...

      When Dalvik, is, for all intents and purposes, a subset of Java, that's fragmentation. Surely you're not in favor of that?