IN A split decision that all but guaranteed continuing litigation, a US district court jury in San Francisco has decided Google infringed on the overall structure of software copyrights held by Oracle, but also said Google had not violated other important parts of Oracle’s software known as Java.
The limited decision means Google will not have to redesign its Android operating system – which would have slowed the march of Android-powered phones that have steadily gained market share against Apple’s iPhone. Oracle had sued Google claiming Google violated its copyrights to Java when it built the Android operating system.
Oracle, which is likely to receive only modest damages for the copyright violation, will seek to have Google obtain a licence to use Java, something Google does not want to do because it could make Oracle influential in future versions of Android. In a statement after the verdict, Oracle said “every major commercial enterprise – except Google – has a licence for Java”.
The jury said Google had violated copyright, but could not decide whether the violation was an acceptable level of fair use. A lawyer for Google, citing what he saw as a contradiction in that verdict, said in court after the decision was read that Google would call for a mistrial. The trial, which put the chief executives of both companies on the witness stand, concerned intellectual property for the Java software language that Oracle acquired when it bought Sun Microsystems. Java is a critical element of devices like smartphones and tablets running Android under the hood.
A parallel case, involving two patents in Java, began on Monday.
The jury found Google did improperly use an aspect of Java, nine lines of software code called rangeCheck, when it designed Android. The jury said Google did not violate Oracle’s other copyrights.
Google, with its vast cash reserves, could absorb any licensing fees it might be forced to pay to continue using Java, which is typically distributed free to programmers and for a fee to companies, as long as they agree to abide by certain rules.
But the decision raises questions about how carefully Google treats intellectual property rights, and could raise doubts among phone makers, who might wonder what other legal claims might be lurking – from Apple, Microsoft or Nokia, for example.Despite Google’s loss on one copyright count on Monday, the partial nature of the jury’s decisions indicated Google would continue to fight, said Al Hilwa, an analyst with IDC. – (New York Times service)
