Back to the courtroom
Oracle claim Googles use of Android decidedly unfair in appeal
Undeterred by their defeat last year, Oracle want the Android decision reversed after judge’s error.
Despite losing the protracted Android infringement battle with Google last year, Oracle show no sign of letting up, filing their first appeal brief which orders the decision to be reversed. The database giant were ordered by Judge Alsup to foot the $1.1m bill for the near year-long court battle, after it was ruled Google had fairly used Java patents within the mobile platform. Now Oracle claim that the judge’s decision was a “basic legal error” and that Google’s usage of Android was “decidedly unfair.” Oracle first sued Google in 2010 for infringing the copyright on 37 Java APIs in Android, seeking billions in damages. The defendant however argued that they had free reign to use those APIs under fair use. A jury initially delivered a partial verdict in Oracle’s favour, but without taking fair use into consideration. After much deliberation, the presiding judge tossed out Oracle’s claim, ruling that APIs were not copyrightable, a landmark ruling that affected developers across the industry. Oracle argue in this new filing that the use of Java “enabled Google to rush Android to market,” which in part allowed it become a commercial success. “Copyright protects a short poem or even a Chinese menu or jingle,” wrote Oracle attorney E.Joshua Rosenkranz. “But the copied works here were vastly more original, creative, and labor-intensive. Nevertheless, the district court stripped them of all copyright protection. The court saw this software as just different.” Within the filing, Oracle use a hypothetical scenario to back up their argument, by creating a fictional “Ann Droid”. In Oracle’s analogy, the fictional author steals parts of J.K. Rowling’s “Harry Potter” after seeing the advance copy. “Defendant Google Inc has copied a blockbuster literary work just as surely, and as improperly, as Ann Droid,” the Oracle attorney explained. Google have yet to comment on the appeal brief from Oracle, with their own due in May. Image courtesy of Dan4th