Oracle Sues Google Over Android

[maxsp33d]

And another thing, google DNA patent and you'll see something that is really messed up. Big corporations doing DNA research actually patent their discoveries, so they basically OWN PARTS OF LIVING ORGANISMS. Just one more fact of how disturbing is the patent system. How can you patent something that you didn't invent? Something which is a result of evolution. In worst case some Corporation will claim that it owns the human genome and all of us will have to pay a license to live.

 

[DjEaZy]

... somebody should say google, that they are not the ruler of the world... go Oracle/SUN... i like your O...

 

[descendency]

[citation][nom]maxsp33d[/nom]The whole patent system is FLAWED. It only slows and sometimes even stops developing new technology. Open source and Creative Commons is the way to go if you want technology moving forward.[/citation]
This comment should be promoted from 20 to infinity.

 

[irh_1974]

OK, no one is doubting the legitimacy of Oracles claims.
They own the copyright, fine.
But they are in the business of making money so they dont just sit on their collective asses, thousands of companies must approach then all the time with licencing deals.
If it is proved that Google used the patents without even speaking to Oracle to enter into a licencing deal then despite anyones personal feelings towards their yummy new Android phone, the fact is they need to give Oracle money to licence it.

What makes it worse is they android is supposed to be Open Source.
If it contains proprietary code then that just dirties the name of Open Source.

Google needs to sort this out pronto because people want their Android phones - me included.

 

[irh_1974]

[citation][nom]stuoke[/nom]Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't google not charge for Android OS? And if they don't dont charge how can they be sued?[/citation]
If I break into your house and steal your TV, but then give it away to someone else, that is still theft and the person I gave it to is recieving stolen goods. Not a perfect analogy but you get the idea.

 

[number13]

I wonder if I could get a patent on using key strokes to active software functions, then I could sue every game company, OS builder, and App builder

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]irh_1974[/nom]If I break into your house and steal your TV, but then give it away to someone else, that is still theft and the person I gave it to is recieving stolen goods. Not a perfect analogy but you get the idea.[/citation]

Patents doesn't have anything to do with theft. Fortunately in Europe we don't have software patents.

 

[Guest]

The idea of patent is not always wrong having said that patent on computer codes is ridiculous. They are just a bunch of commands. It's like giving exclusive rights to a phrase, copy rights for books covers the whole content not a phrase or a paragraph in a certain chapter.
The extent of patent is getting out of hand.

 

[irh_1974]

[citation][nom]Tri-ring[/nom]The idea of patent is not always wrong having said that patent on computer codes is ridiculous. They are just a bunch of commands[/citation]
That is just the same as saying Shakespeare is just a bunch of words, but if you pass off Hamlet as your own work that is still plagarism.
[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]Patents doesn't have anything to do with theft[/citation]
Of course they do, intellectual property is still property. If I spent money to develop code then someone else just uses it then they are stealing something that I have paid to develop.
[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]Fortunately in Europe we don't have software patents.[/citation]
Why don't you tell everyone that is a profound oversimplification. What it infact says is:

Patentability under European Patent Office case law
Like the other parts of the paragraph 2, computer programs are open to patenting to the extent that they provide a technical contribution to the prior art. In the case of computer programs and according to the case law of the Boards of Appeal, a technical contribution typically means a further technical effect that goes beyond the normal physical interaction between the program and the computer.

Though many argue that there is an inconsistency on how the EPO now applies Article 52, the practice of the EPO is fairly consistent regarding the treatment of the different elements of Article 52(2). A mathematical method is not patentable, but an electrical filter designed according to this method would not be excluded from patentability by Article 52(2) and (3).

According to the jurisprudence of the Boards of Appeal of the EPO, a technical effect provided by a computer program can be, for example, a reduced memory access time, a better control of a robotic arm or an improved reception and/or decoding of a radio signal. It does not have to be external to the computer on which the program is run; reduced hard disk access time[citation needed] or an enhanced user interface could also be a technical effect

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_under_the_European_Patent_Convention

Java is such code and as such is patentable under European law - but I digress - it is under US law also, Oracle is in the US, Google is in the US and the suit was filed also in the US.

 

[Guest]

I have said it many times in the past, Apple, Sun, Microsoft, and now Oracle are buying up patents left and right. In very short order we will have nothing less then a full blown patent war going on with legal proceedings and kickbacks. This is all a sham, and the patent system needs to be rewritten. Just because you are the first one with enough money and know-how to get something patented, doesn't mean you invented it and deserve royalties from it...

 

[Djhg2000]

What good has Oracle done with Sun so far anyway?

They already killed OpenSolaris and who knows what will go next? VirtuallBox OSE? OpenOffice?

 

[fayzaan]

omg!!!! my googles are being sued!!

 

[long2know]

Baseless, as Google has stated.

My big problem with this is that Java was released as Open Source back in 2007. Google has adheared to the GPL as far as I know.

But you know what? Dalvik doesn't actually RUN Java byte-code. The byte-code gets converted to .dex format.

My point is, their approach is more like the .NET approach. They could replace Java with probably any other language in short order. If I were them, I would even consider just using Mono with C#. I would also be preemptive about it. Don't wait for the suit to be remedied. Done. Bye Oracle.

 

[matt314]

[citation][nom]zaixionito[/nom]Saw this. Oracle is a bunch of jerks. They acquire stuff to get patents, then sue Google.[/citation]

Ya. That's called business.

 

[matt314]

[citation][nom]Tri-ring[/nom]The idea of patent is not always wrong having said that patent on computer codes is ridiculous. They are just a bunch of commands. It's like giving exclusive rights to a phrase, copy rights for books covers the whole content not a phrase or a paragraph in a certain chapter. The extent of patent is getting out of hand.[/citation]

That's theres very little software innovation in europe.

 

[scook9]

I can see it now.....

(Next Week) - Google announces acquisition of Oracle

 

[hemelskonijn]

Seems like a lot of people forget that opensource is not equal to free. There are a lot of applications that are completely opensource while they are sold for a lot of cash and there is no free edition. Most of the time when opensource is discussed it seems like people think of GPL (where the source code has to be delivered with any application under GPL license and any one is allowed to use the source code) while in fact there are countless other licenses like in example BSD that does not forces the source code to be available and it wont force applications based on the code base to use the BSD license. In the case of a BSD licensed program some one could fork it and release the fork under their own closed source license. To be honest i dont really know what license they use but as far as i know they use (former sun now) Oracle Corporation Binary Code License.

At the end of the day i don't really care what license they use, however i do have my own perspective on patents. When your making an analogy between software and books you should keep in mind that books are a specific combination of letters which forms a specific combination of words which in turn tells us a story in the analogy software patents mostly cover a few letters or maybe even a whole sentence but not a complete book. Imagine getting a patent on the word "The"!

 

[bluekoala]

[citation][nom]irh_1974[/nom]If I break into your house and steal your TV, but then give it away to someone else, that is still theft and the person I gave it to is recieving stolen goods. Not a perfect analogy but you get the idea.[/citation]


That's a terrible analogy. No one broke into anyone's house and no one's god damn TV is missing

 

[FloKid]

Wow the world must really hate each other.

 

[hawkwindeb]

[citation][nom]djhg2000[/nom]What good has Oracle done with Sun so far anyway?They already killed OpenSolaris and who knows what will go next? VirtuallBox OSE? OpenOffice?[/citation]
Get your facts straight before you comment. Oracle has not killed OpenSolaris. Where is your source for that statement?? Some want-a-be tech analyst, FUD from a competitor of Oracle/Sun, or just plain hearsay. Oracle has committed to OpenSolaris! It is the development foundation for Sun Solaris now called Oracle Solaris. Oracle Solaris and OpenSolaris are both alive, doing well, have a strong solid roadmap, and a long future.

As for VirturalBox, it is one of the virtualization technologies that Oracle is moving forward and will continue to support as Open Source as well as supporting with commercial support contracts for those folks that rely on it enough to want such a level of support. (yes, commercial support contracts to make money which is not a bad thing, so don't hate a company for making money, Sun should have done more of that making money thing)

Kill OpenOffice, are you kidding???? Why would they kill or stop it from being Open Source when it's making a dent in Microsoft Office sales and gaining so much momentum. If they don't already, they will most likely offer commercial support contracts on it as well.

 

[hawkwindeb]

[citation][nom]bluekoala[/nom]That's a terrible analogy. No one broke into anyone's house and no one's god damn TV is missing[/citation]
That's a funny comment and made be laugh hard but on the other hand it was a pretty good analogy. Google allegedly broke into the code (IMO, the owner of the patent's house in metaphor) are using the code without permission and/or compensation which is stealing, then if they sell or give the code away, the end user is receiving stolen goods. Has Google made any statements that they will indemnify the end users?

 

[lashton]

not many people know that you now need to prove a active and working concept of patents now, so if oracle is NOT dveeloping anything with thier Java (not open source stuff) they still have copyrights but cant sue via patent infringement

 

[maestintaolius]

This is how you know you've made it as a software company, you get sued by other software companies.

 

[maydaynomore]

[citation][nom]maxsp33d[/nom]And another thing, google DNA patent and you'll see something that is really messed up. Big corporations doing DNA research actually patent their discoveries, so they basically OWN PARTS OF LIVING ORGANISMS. Just one more fact of how disturbing is the patent system. How can you patent something that you didn't invent? Something which is a result of evolution. In worst case some Corporation will claim that it owns the human genome and all of us will have to pay a license to live.[/citation]
Corporations for a long time now have been patenting plant seeds (fruits and vegetables). Now thats disturbing!

 

[mikem_90]

Be aware, we'll be seeing a LOT more of this with the patent system like it is.

With companies placing patents on ideas, abstract concepts, and "we do it like this". Its going to be a MAJOR roadblock to ANY new business out there.

They say small business drives the economy, this will kill small business unless they pay big fees to license tech in order to MAKE SOMETHING NEW.

Imagine if all scientists had to pay the families of previous scientists who they based their work off. Not a whole lot of science would get done.

These days, you need a law firm to hunt and track down all the patents you might infringe by making something new and creating something, lest you run across one of those patents designed to rake in cash.

Some large companies have patents on file that they could sue another for, but don't because the other company has a bunch of patents that they could use them for. They kind of agree not to sue each other. But if some newcomer comes into the market, woe to them.