Oracle's action is a neutron bomb at Open Source Camp

Original author: Martin Heller
  • Transfer
As you know, Oracle sued Google in connection with the use of Java without a license in the Android operating system. Naturally, Google rejects the allegations and says that it did not violate other people's intellectual property. All this is quite normal and is part of the usual legal battles. But what’s abnormal is that part of the Oracle claim, which, as they say, is printed in small print. The requirements of Oracle and its real actions, if you look, should seriously scare not only Google, but the entire Open Source community.

Oracle requires that all copies of Android (including devices sold with this operating system) be destroyed, as well as triple damages and legal costs. Of course, this is a bluff. In fact, Google can pay off pretty cheaply, but this beneficial move for Google will be very dangerous for the IT industry. That's the trap.

Martin Heller from Infoworld yesterday published an analysis of Oracle's claims and a forecast of the possible development of this lawsuit.

At first glance, the situation for Google looks rather gloomy.

For example, one of Oracle's lawyers in this case is David Boies. He is known for having recently won the case of lifting the ban on same-sex marriage in California, as well as the old antitrust trial against Microsoft. He was also an adviser to the RIAA in the Napster case and represented Vice President Al Gore at a hearing contesting the vote count in the 2004 US presidential election. No one hires David Boyes unless he has very serious intentions.

Oracle claims for infringement of seven software patents.

* Protection Domains to Provide Security in a Computer System (2000)
* Controlling Access to a Resource (2000)
* Method and Apparatus for Preprocessing and Packaging Class Files (1999)
* System and Method for Dynamic Preloading of Classes through Memory Space Cloning of a Master Runtime System Process (2008)
* Method and Apparatus for Resolving Data References in Generate Code (2003)
* Interpreting Functions Utilizing a Hybrid of Virtual and Native Machine Instructions (2005 )
* Method and System for Performing Static Initialization (2000)

These are all software patents.

Unfortunately, despite the recent decision in the Bilsky case , the US Supreme Court did not dare to revoke the software patents entirely, and the discussion on this issue is still ongoing, although the absurdity of patenting software techniques is obvious to many. And the Supreme Court seems to be heading towards this.

There are also allegations of copyright infringement. But I think that they will all be rejected at the beginning of the lawsuit if the Android team reportedly created the Dalvik VM as a result of pure reverse engineering of the Java VM and can prove it.

Phoenix Technologies at one time managed to do this trick with the IBM PC BIOS, so it is possible that Google will be able to prove this in the case of Java.

Killing requirements Oracle
Oracle requires the destruction of all copies of Android (including devices sold with this operating system), as well as to compensate for the damage in triplicate and legal costs. They also require a trial.

These are clearly exaggerated requirements. They could, as they say, ask for "more and a pony." No court will give them all of the above, even based on the results of the trial in Northern California. What can I say, even in East Texas they would not have achieved this.

But if Oracle wins, some of the requirements can still be satisfied. But in this case, Google’s appeal will be 100% appealed, and the court will probably delay the execution of the requirements until the appeal is reviewed.

If Google wins the appeal, then Oracle can appeal to the Supreme Court. However, if it comes to this level, then there is a high probability that the Supreme Court will decide to cancel all patents altogether. This threat alone is enough to prevent Oracle from bringing the process to that stage.

How Google can negotiate
Google can reach a pre-trial agreement with Oracle is pretty cheap. There are two options for this: payout in cash or cross-licensing.

However, such an agreement can greatly damage the IT industry, even if it is beneficial for Google. If Google agrees to pay the money, then a whole series of new victims are lining up for Oracle, which will already be defenseless by the results of the decision: HTC, Motorola, Samsung, other smartphone manufacturers, Verizon Wireless, T-Mobile, other telecom operators, and even large companies, who use Android devices. This could be a real nightmare for the mobile industry.

It seemed that it was far better for everyone to conclude a cross-license agreement. In this case, most likely, Google will protect all licensees and Android users from future claims from Oracle.

Some of my colleagues urge to fork immediately.all open source Sun projects, in order to somehow protect them from future Oracle actions. But I doubt that they will be able to bring the matter to such a stage when the projects are really safe.

Hit a sore spot
If I were radical as I was 20, I would call for a worldwide boycott of Oracle products, because this lawsuit is similar to dropping a neutron bomb on an open source community.

Think about it: Oracle DBMS users can upgrade to IBM DB2 or Microsoft SQL Server, and MySQL users can migrate to Monty fork or Postgres. Oracle Forms and Oracle Web Forms users can migrate to Alpha Five, and Oracle ERP customers can choose from SAP, Microsoft, or Sage.

Are you ready to vote with your wallet?

Also popular now: