Oracle tries to resurrect third patent against Android

3. Scott_H posted on 25 Apr 2012, 12:59 5 0

Even if Google is found to infringe on valid IP (which doesn't seem terribly likely in this case), it's no more "stealing" than failing to pay your rent on time is. Don't confuse corporate PR mumbo-jumbo with actual legal terms.

Also, everyone, from Apple to Oracle to Microsoft has both lost IP cases and agreed to pay licensing fees for IP they were already using. Pretending like the term "stealing" can be wielded like a verbal weapon against a company you don't like is both wrong and disingenuous, since it's a fact of making products in the mobile world.

6. eaxvac posted on 25 Apr 2012, 13:54 2 2

just trolling on the android fans :) Was surprised that you replied. Thumbs up

9. Scott_H posted on 25 Apr 2012, 15:09 4 0

I guess everyone needs a hobby...

• This comment is posted in response to #6 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #6 Hide

10. protozeloz posted on 25 Apr 2012, 15:49 2 0

Oh now you know my pain. But haters will hate

• This comment is posted in response to #9 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #9 Hide

8. Scott_H posted on 25 Apr 2012, 13:58 0 0

I believe Google is actually looking into inventing it's own programming language, which may have been a hedge in case things went really south in these lawsuits.

Anyhow, I think Oracle thought early on they could get an injunction that would let them stop shipment on all U.S. Android products. That would basically force Google to give them whatever they wanted (unless Google hedged its bets...see first part), which could mean not just billions of dollars, but maybe they thought they could control future versions to some degree. Oracle knows how huge mobile is, and they might think this is their last best chance to get a slice of that pie.

11. dallas90733 posted on 25 Apr 2012, 21:43 1 0

Thank you Scott!

7. Scott_H posted on 25 Apr 2012, 13:55 0 0

I think this would be the most equitable choice, although Judge Alsup has been adamant about trying to avoid another round of litigation that would tie up the courts resources - that's why he denied Oracle's requires to postpone the patent portion of the trial. So it will be interesting to see if he agrees with us.