Google wants Oracle lawyer held in contempt for releasing confidential information

Google wants Oracle lawyer held in contempt for releasing confidential information
It all dates back to 2010 when Oracle sued Google for using Java's APIs without permission. Google argued that APIs cannot be afforded patent protection and a jury ruled in Google's favor back in 2012. Two years later, the decision was partly reversed. Last year, the Supreme Court felt the case wasn't worthy of being argued before them, and remanded the case back to lower court. For its part, Google plans on switching to the open source version of Java, Open JDK, starting with Android N.

With Oracle and Google in court recently, an Oracle attorney revealed confidential information from a folder marked "For Attorney's Eyes Only." The leak revealed that Google has made $22 billion in profits on Android. One leak led to another as it was reported that Google had paid Apple $1 billion in 2014 to keep its search bar on the iPhone. Both morsels of juicy information were not to be released to the public.

Google has sent a letter to the court, asking it to find the Oracle attorney who revealed the confidential information in contempt. Google is looking for sanctions that would prevent Oracle's attorney from obtaining Samsung documents containing confidential information. Samsung is also requesting that the attorney be prevented from viewing confidential information relating to a third party.

In its letter to the court, Google said that the statements made by the Oracle attorney violated a protective order. "The severe potential consequences of public disclosure quickly became reality, particularly given the surprising nature of the disclosure," Google wrote.

source: Reuters

FEATURED VIDEO

31 Comments

2. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

I understand confidential info is confidential info, but the how much Google has made or gave to Apple shouldnt hurt their case.

6. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

Or help Oracle case. Google profit and apple deal has no relationship with API being entitled to copyright or not. Even on the argument of fair use it has no bearing. Very unprofessional.

7. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

It does actually, how can you build a case of how much profit needs to be shared for using code without permission...by only knowing how much you directly made from the ecosystem...in this case 22billion. Considering the very backbone of android is Java, this is huge as it could go into billions for oracle

9. TerryTerius unregistered

But that has nothing to do with whether or not that should be public knowledge. The attorneys litigating this case already know the numbers. What was the point of revealing that to the rest of the world?

16. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

Oh I agree, he shouldn't have let the cat out of the bag during the trial, but Google possibly cant get the info hidden. It almost sounds like Google is trying to lie about the cash they take in, it is a possible motivation for the attorney to do this. However I have no clue what motive, dumb he did it. At the end of the day, interesting to see if found in Oracles favor, what the fine would be since its the backbone of android to an extent.

21. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

Every remark you ever make about Google is negetive. So no surprises there, elitewolverine.

27. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

I could say the same about you for other companies...apple doesn't fall far from its tree. I said nothing negative and even called the Oracle dumb, it is clear your reading comprehension is really low today...perhaps debate tomorrow when you have a chance to read what I wrote.

11. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

Yes, but it doesn't have any bearing on if they are in violation or not. Once that's proved or disproved, if Google is found guilty, then it has bearing for the penalty phase of the trial. But even then, as Terry said the only people who need to know the particulars are the plaintiff, defendant, and the judge, no one else. IIRC didn't Apple go after Samsung for divulging what was supposed to be "attorney's eyes only" information? So was that OK as well? If it's wrong for one it's wrong for all, or vice versa.

26. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

Find one post where I said it was ok? Even in my first post I never said it was RIGHT. Only replied to the part where it has bearing on the case.

20. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

IMO how much they make off Android should only come into play if Google loses. Google hasnt lost the case yet. Oracle needs to focus on one thing at a time with this case. Apple never really goes into how much Samsung makes in their copying cases, just that they feel Samsung copied them and they want compensation. This just smells like a diversion, muddying the waters tactic.

8. ph00ny

Posts: 2051; Member since: May 26, 2011

Attorney's Eyes Only is Attorney's Eyes Only no matter what information is written on the piece of paper. Releasing privileged information should be good enough for a sanction

5. MrElectrifyer

Posts: 3960; Member since: Oct 21, 2014

I honestly don't feel sorry for the spyware-made-legal...

13. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

If you honestly believe that Google is the only one making use of user's info, you're either in denial or delusional. How do you think all of these companies' software is made better, by user surveys? And if you use services like Facebook or Twitter, you've got no room to complain about companies using personal info.

14. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

Lets leave logic out of this.. Google is evil, deal with it. :-) And if that person ever used a Sony product...years ago Sony was found to have actual rootkit type software on their music CD's.....used for copyright protection. That could wreck major havoc on a PC if someone wanted to do some bad stuff. I'm still a Sony fan but it has made me cautious about what CD's to put in my PC.

15. MrElectrifyer

Posts: 3960; Member since: Oct 21, 2014

Easy with the asinine assumptions dumbass...just 'cause others do it too doesn't make me feel sorry for the spyware's own confidential information being released.

19. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

So google is spyware for using your info, but others do it and you don't have your special little names for them? I may be a dumbass, but I'm not a hypocritical dumbass. And I could give 2 $hits if you feel sorry them or not, but the fact of the after is that Oracle's lawyer broke the law. But since you have a personal bias against Google that's OK right?

22. MrElectrifyer

Posts: 3960; Member since: Oct 21, 2014

Cry me a river you butthurt faggot, this is about google here, but keep impotently trying to bring others into the topic and making asinine assumptions if that makes you feel any better...

23. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

What is it with people here on PA lately? I disagreed with you, that's it. Now I need to be called names to get your point across? Are you incapable of having a discussion without resorting to that? I did it only after you did it to me, but if that's the only way your capable of arguing your point, I'll move on to an adult conversation. Well try again when you don't sound like a 10 year old.

24. MrElectrifyer

Posts: 3960; Member since: Oct 21, 2014

"I disagreed with you, that's it. Now I need to be called names to get your point across? Are you incapable of having a discussion without resorting to that?" Says the one that began making asinine assumptions and saying I'm in denial or delusional...hypocrite much? You don't start a discussion by making asinine assumptions about the other person, that just makes an ass out of both of us when it was never the intention to begin with.

25. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

Was asinine on your word of the day toilet paper? And you're comparing calling someone delusional to calling someone a butthurt faggot? Not quite the same thing there slappy. And what assumptions am I making? You're calling Google spyware, yet I've never seen you say the same thing about Apple or MS, and it's not like they don't do the same thing.

28. MrElectrifyer

Posts: 3960; Member since: Oct 21, 2014

"Was asinine on your word of the day toilet paper?" Just the best word to describe your action... "And you're comparing calling someone delusional to calling someone a butthurt faggot?" Name calling is name calling, regardless how you feel your name calling is to others...quit the hypocritical double standards then maybe you'll be able to have a discussion without name calling. "And what assumptions am I making? You're calling Google spyware, yet I've never seen you say the same thing about Apple or MS, and it's not like they don't do the same thing." You pretty much answered your own question there. You're presuming I think only google is spying on it's users when I never mentioned nor implied that...improve on those your English comprehension skills or simply ask for clarification instead of making asinine assumptions.

29. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

And the best words to describe your actions would be off your meds. The last time I saw someone go off on someone else like you did here was Arte, and that's saying something. Okay, keep telling yourself that. There's a reason some words carry more weight than others, to convey a stronger exclamation. But since you were apparently trying to describe how I was acting as I did to you previously, how was I acting as a faggot? And use of slurs tells me that you don't have a lot of thought behind your words. I'm going by the positive remarks you've made about non Google companies in past articles. I've never heard you call either MS or Apple spyware or malware. If you have, where?

30. MrElectrifyer

Posts: 3960; Member since: Oct 21, 2014

"how was I acting as a faggot" By the definition dummy: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=faggot And you're still being a butthurt faggot here again, crying that I called your beloved company a spyware and trying to bring other companies into the topic when this was about google...but keep it going if that's what makes you feel better. Got no more time for you cry baby.

31. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

"By the definition dummy" And then you link the urbandictionary? Christ is your resume in crayon? That site has no more credibility than Wikipedia. Sorry but most anyone who uses that term is referring to someone who's gay. It shows up in every "definition" in the link. As far as my favorite company, no it's not, far from it. But what I'm saying is you can't call someone out for one thing, and then ignore it when others do the same. I notice you ignored the final paragraph in my last post, which was at the heart of the matter, instead going to something more innocuous. Maybe check your English comprehension skills because that was my point in the first post.

32. Sniggly

Posts: 7305; Member since: Dec 05, 2009

Man, I have been gone too long. Is this really what level anti-Google dips**ts have fallen to? Just a bunch of homophobic troglodytes?

34. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

It's funny you mentioned that. I don't think he read through all of the "definitions" when he linked to the urbandictionary, otherwise he might've seen this one. "What insecure young males call each other when they don't have anything intelligent, clever, or witty to say. The term is meant to be derogatory, but usually just points out that the person who uses it is unsure about their own sexuality."

10. darkkjedii

Posts: 31280; Member since: Feb 05, 2011

Put another way: Google is pissed at Oracle for snitching.

12. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

Same thing happened in the Apple/Samsung trial, when Samsung divulged "attorney's eyes only" information, and Apple asked for sanctions.

17. SkyfallWalker

Posts: 73; Member since: Jan 28, 2016

It was unprofessional of the Lawyer or Oracle if they were responsible.

18. SkyfallWalker

Posts: 73; Member since: Jan 28, 2016

It was unprofessional of the Lawyer or Oracle if they were responsible.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.