Subscribe / Unsubscribe Enewsletters | Login | Register

Pencil Banner

Major damages sought in Oracle-Google patent dispute

Matt Hamblen, Computerworld | June 7, 2011
A new document in a year-old patent lawsuit filed by Oracle against Google over Android intellectual property suggests Oracle could be seeking huge damages from Google.

 

The damages owed to Oracle, if granted by federal Judge William Alsup for the U.S. District Court for Northern California, would "far exceed any money Google has ever earned with Android" and could lead to a rewrite of Android's Dalvik virtual machine, considered integral to Android and used by Android device manufacturers and potentially thousands of Android app developers, wrote one blogger, Florian Mueller, who writes about intellectual property issues involving the software industry.

The actual damages Oracle is demanding are unclear, since many portions of the latest five-page document are blacked out of view in the publicly available version filed Monday in federal court.

Oracle sued Google last August, claiming the Android operating system violates Java patents and copyrights that Oracle inherited when it bought Sun Microsystems. Google denies the charges and claims the case is an attack on open source.

Google's attorney, Scott Weingaertner, of the law firm King & Spaulding in New York, filed the document in response to an expert's opinion on damages in the case entered earlier by Iain Cockburn on behalf of Oracle. Cockburn, a professor of economics at the Boston University School of Management, has provided expert testimony in other patent cases where the valuation of intellectual property is at issue. His damages report has not been made public, and Google's response is the first indication of what it says.

Experts who testify in lawsuits are usually discredited by the opposing counsel, and Cockburn is no exception. Google's attorney said Cockburn made legal errors that are "fundamental and disqualifying," adding that allowing him to testify to a jury would "prejudice Google."

Weingaertner also said that Cockburn is at fault for seeming to contend that advertising revenue Google receives from mobile searches on Android devices should be subject to royalties owed to Oracle for its patents on Java technology that Oracle argues are being used in Android.

Google notes that it does not receive any payment or fee for Android, which is widely considered open

source software.

Google's attorney further states that Cockburn found that an "unprecedented" 50% royalty rate was owed to Oracle, and that Cockburn failed to tie that rate to the patented technology at issue in the case.

Weingaertner also states that Cockburn calculated Oracle's loss due to Google's alleged patent infringement based on all Java software, "even though the patented features are only a small part of Java."

 

1  2  Next Page 

Sign up for Computerworld eNewsletters.