Home IT companies Oracle vs.Google: The jury has reached a verdict

Oracle vs.Google: The jury has reached a verdict

by admin

Today in federal court in San Francisco 12 jurors announced their verdict. The jury found the Internet giant guilty, but only partially: Google was found not guilty on two of the four charges.
The jury unanimously agreed that Google borrowed the structure and organization of the Java language from Oracle.
Also, Google was found guilty of copyright infringement by Oracle, on nine lines of Java source code that are/were in Android.
The litigation is not over yet : the court has yet to assess the losses that Oracle has suffered as a result of Google’s violations.
Recall that Oracle is demanding about $1 billion in compensation.
The rangeCheck method from the file array.java which the court found had been borrowed, lines 788 through 802:

/*** Checks that {@code fromIndex} and {@code toIndex} are in* the range and throws an appropriate exception, if they aren't.*/private static void rangeCheck(int length, int fromIndex, int toIndex) {if (fromIndex > toIndex) {throw new IllegalArgumentException("fromIndex(" + fromIndex + ") > toIndex(" + toIndex + ")");}if (fromIndex < 0) {throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(fromIndex);}if (toIndex > length) {throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(toIndex);}}

Excerpt from the jury’s verdict :
1-A) Considering that the APIs can be copyrighted (this is a separate trial and has not yet been decided), whether Google has violated the copyright on the 37 JAVA API package – YES.
1-B) If 1a YES, whether copyright infringement was "fair use" – not decided.
Oracle vs.Google: The jury has reached a verdict
2-A) Has the copyright of the documentation for these 37 JAVA API packages been violated – NO.
2-B) The second part of the question is ignored because 2-A is NO.
Oracle vs.Google: The jury has reached a verdict
3) Has it been proven that Google took the code from :
3-A) The rangeCheck function is YES.
3-B) Code in 7 "Impl.java" files and one "ACL" file – NO.
3-C) Comments in the code in English in some files – NO.
(This part needs clarification; Oracle originally claimed ~100k lines of code, but only some of it was considered in court. A detailed description is in the document : [ link ])
Oracle vs.Google: The jury has reached a verdict
4-A) Has Google proven that Sun/Oracle knew or could have known that some of their actions made Google aware that licensing was not required – YES.
4-B) Whether Google has proven that it actually acted on these actions of Sun/Oracle in deciding to use copyrighted material without a license – NO.
Oracle vs.Google: The jury has reached a verdict
For more information, thanks to hubrachelovek StasTs
Related Links :
Bloomberg: [ link ]
Verge: [ link ]
Reuters: [ link ]
CNet: [ link ]
Case details on Habra : [ link ]

You may also like