Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Android Oracle Google The Almighty Buck The Courts Your Rights Online

Oracle v. Google Trial On Indefinite Hold 66

Posted by Soulskill
from the hurry-up-and-wait dept.
symbolset writes "The trial in which Oracle is suing Google over Android has been put on indefinite hold by the trial judge, until Oracle comes up with a credible methodology for figuring alleged damages. The trial was planned to start on or after March 19."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Oracle v. Google Trial On Indefinite Hold

Comments Filter:
  • by crovira (10242) on Friday January 13, 2012 @03:10PM (#38690740) Homepage

    What other proof do you need???

  • by sgt scrub (869860) <<moc.oohay> <ta> <muitnias>> on Friday January 13, 2012 @03:11PM (#38690760)

    er... The judges decision, not the IP.

    • by poetmatt (793785)

      Wha?

      You're absolutely correct. The IP in this case is worth absolutely zero, because the patents in this lawsuit are questionable at best.

      • Re:Pricless! (Score:5, Informative)

        by idontgno (624372) on Friday January 13, 2012 @03:56PM (#38691310) Journal

        It's better than that, too.

        Oracle is responsible for delays which is jeopardizing its own case. If you read through the Groklaw articles about this case, it's pretty clear that Oracle's patents are being disintegrated by the Patent and Trademark Office's reexaminations. [cnet.com]. They've already lost about half of their asserted claims [groklaw.net] in the case, and they run the risk of further invalidation of the patents they're asserting here if they delay any further.

        It would be hilariously ironic if they finally come up with a credible damages assessment just about the same time all of their patents completely evaporate.

        • To quote Slashdot's favorite legal assistant:

          "After seeing these filings I can't help but note the irony (and hubris) of a company choosing to name itself Oracle when it seems to be incapable of "giving wise or authoritative decisions or opinions."

        • Re:Pricless! (Score:4, Insightful)

          by gutnor (872759) on Friday January 13, 2012 @09:37PM (#38694558)
          Too bad the judges are not so discerning with the small people. Oracle needs to come with a convincing methodology. Does the RIAA have one ? Also, since regardless who win, the end-user will not be affected whatsoever - I think that would be better for Oracle to win to highlight in a bit more spectacular fashion the idiocy of the current patent system. (well, hopefully there is still some fun to be had on the mobile market - hopefully they don't settle and cross-license )
  • by Gibgezr (2025238) on Friday January 13, 2012 @03:12PM (#38690764)
    "For this “delay,” Oracle has no one to blame but itself, given that twice now it has advanced improper methodologies obviously calculated to reach stratospheric numbers." - Judge Alsup He isn't pulling any punches, is he?
    • by Anonymous Coward
      I understand that Oracle based their damages calculations on the scheme they use for licensing charges.
    • by Mathinker (909784) on Friday January 13, 2012 @03:57PM (#38691336) Journal

      > Oracle has no one to blame but itself

      Where does this judge live? The MPAA, RIAA, and BSA have been doing this for years, now, no? And as far as I know, no US judge has called them out when they cite their "research" as background information in a court case.

      • by Pieroxy (222434) on Friday January 13, 2012 @04:14PM (#38691502) Homepage

        > Oracle has no one to blame but itself

        Where does this judge live? The MPAA, RIAA, and BSA have been doing this for years, now, no? And as far as I know, no US judge has called them out when they cite their "research" as background information in a court case.

        I don't think MPAA or RIAA has been suing anyone on patents grounds yet.

    • by gv250 (897841)
      Oracle was actually hoping for astronomical numbers. By asking for only stratospheric numbers, they were hoping to appear reasonable by comparison.
    • Rather than an "indefinite on-hold period" where the lawyers are on standby, why not give them a hold period with a firm deadline (after which the case is dropped if Oracle can't produce)?

    • by tlhIngan (30335) <.slashdot. .at. .worf.net.> on Friday January 13, 2012 @05:58PM (#38692652)

      "For this âoedelay,â Oracle has no one to blame but itself, given that twice now it has advanced improper methodologies obviously calculated to reach stratospheric numbers." - Judge Alsup He isn't pulling any punches, is he?

      Well, it's an indefinite hold. Which means that the longer it goes on, the more painful it can get. Oracle may simple just wait until the numbers are right.

      Given $2B in damagers, and Google has admitted to at least 200M Android devices have been activated, that's $10/device. One reasonable method is to see how much Oracle charges for a J2ME license to begin with (it's one of the biggest sources of money in Java - given all the featurephones out there with a JVM).

      Oracle may argue that since Samsung/LG/HTC pay Microsoft around $5 per Android to license Microsoft's patents, perhaps since Oracle's is more fundamental to Android (being possibly related to the whole runtime system), they ought to get $10 per device.

      And they can argue that since the true number of Android devices out there isn't known because of its open-source nature, blah blah blah...

      The MPAA/RIAA can ask for huge numbers becaues there isn't concrete numbers to base their numbers off of. Here there are, at least official Google Android numbers, and they don't work out to something completely crazy like $150,000 per 99 cent track.

      • by DragonWriter (970822) on Friday January 13, 2012 @07:47PM (#38693716)

        Well, it's an indefinite hold. Which means that the longer it goes on, the more painful it can get. Oracle may simple just wait until the numbers are right.

        If Oracle doesn't produce a viable calculation (and even before they next produce one -- the court is still considering whether they get a third try or not) then they simply don't get to put their theory on damages forward at all. And they don't have unlimited basis to put forward new theories, they have to cure specific problems in their previously-advanced calculations.

  • Credible? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Kid Zero (4866) on Friday January 13, 2012 @03:12PM (#38690772) Homepage Journal

    Credible Methodology? That doesn't stop the MPAA/RIAA....

    • by epdp14 (1318641) *
      Thats why the MAFIAA quickly drops suit when they try their crap against someone with deep pockets. (as Oracle is finding out about Google now)
    • by Pecisk (688001)

      Doesn't stop MPAA/RIAA to sue people. To win actually...well, it is totally different story.

      This is classic bully mentality. When you answer to their challenge not in their level, they start to drag their feet.

    • by hey! (33014)

      That's irrelevant. Oracle is suing a company with the cash to fight back. That makes it a "big" case, and I suspect big cases get better judges.

      In any case crazy damage claims are part of the "shock and awe" campaign by the *AA's. It's the "no bad publicity" principle. If they don't win those damages, the *claim* makes news. If they're awarded what they claim and it's overturned on appeal, they get *two* bites of the publicity apple.

    • That's because the MPAA/RIAA only sue individuals, not real people

  • humour (Score:5, Funny)

    by rwv (1636355) on Friday January 13, 2012 @03:20PM (#38690884) Homepage Journal

    From TFA:

    After seeing these filings I can't help but note the irony (and hubris) of a company choosing to name itself Oracle when it seems to be incapable of "giving wise or authoritative decisions or opinions."

    Is Groklaw usually this funny?

  • by turkeyfish (950384) on Friday January 13, 2012 @03:32PM (#38691038)

    Now that their primary purpose for buying Sun's Java technology is no longer useful to them, ie leveraging Java as a way of extorting profits, will Ellison abandon Java? Both are costing him a lot of money without material benefit. At some point will he give up the ghost and just abandon the whole thing or will he keep pumping money into it, hoping against hope to hit pay dirt?

    • Lot of Oracle products rely on Java (data mining/business analyst stuff), so it's not very likely. They just like too much governing over JSR/JCP.

    • Doubtful. PeopleSoft runs on a backend of Java Application Servers like tomcat or BEA (which they also own), and PeopleSoft is extrodinarily profitable.

      • by phorm (591458)

        My mother's Blu-Ray player runs Java.... it's surprising (and a bit scary) how many places it turns up.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 13, 2012 @04:00PM (#38691356)

      Now that their primary purpose for buying Sun's Java technology is no longer useful to them, ie leveraging Java as a way of extorting profits, will Ellison abandon Java? Both are costing him a lot of money without material benefit. At some point will he give up the ghost and just abandon the whole thing or will he keep pumping money into it, hoping against hope to hit pay dirt?

      Ummm, no. The main reason Oracle bought java is that almost all of Oracle's software stack depends on java.

      Without java, Oracle would be nearly helpless. A hostile java owner could cause Oracle an enormous amount of grief.

      Anything else that Oracle can get out of java is just icing on the cake.

  • FTFA:

    "But Google's petition to the appeals court over the email is also in the way, according to Alsup's ruling Thursday. "If Oracle will waive reliance on that email, then this roadblock would vanish," he wrote."

    It's interesting to me that the judge is the one assisting in negotiations between Oracle and Google instead of general counsel. It seems obvious to Alsup even before trial that neither the clumsy infringer nor the litigious patent troll will otherwise meet in the middle.

  • by Un pobre guey (593801) on Friday January 13, 2012 @03:47PM (#38691194) Homepage
    What? What kind of judge doesn't impose ex recto damages? What planet is he from?
  • "For this 'delay,' Oracle has no one to blame but itself, given that twice now it has advanced improper methodologies obviously calculated to reach stratospheric numbers,"

    "stratospheric numbers" for the rest of the world is pocket change to Larry.

  • Android made Java relevant in the mobile smartphone revolution. J2ME is so 1999.

    As such, Android is good business for Oracle. They should strike a deal where Oracle becomes a stakeholder in the Android Open Source project. The, a cross-licensing patent deal. The finally, hold hands while they piss on Jobs' memorial, and sue Apple back into the insignificance where they belong.
  • Oracle, why don't you come back and talk to me when you decide to stop being retarded OK?

  • "that's my methodology, judge. got any cash? hand it over. I've got a devil beard and I'm impatient."

    perhaps the judge should declare Java free to all birds, beasts, and men of good character in the realm.

  • by mbkennel (97636) on Friday January 13, 2012 @08:21PM (#38694042)

    Larry: I hold up my pinky, and it tells me the number. Like a fucking oracle, it is.

  • What is the total amount of damages from something you in no way make money from? $0 duh>
  • The inflated damage amount was calculated by Professor Cockburn.

One possible reason that things aren't going according to plan is that there never was a plan in the first place.

Working...