Oracle and Google’s army of lawyers are finally set to face off in a San Francisco courtroom, after two years of pretrial wrangling in their dispute over Android and the Java programming language.
Both sides recently got a friendly reminder from U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup as they set for the trial. “Counsel are reminded that they should be prepared to give opening statements immediately after the jury is sworn in,” read the quick note from Alsup to lawyers from the two tech heavyweights, adding they may even have time for the first witness.
Oracle says that Android violates two of the Java patents it acquired in its 2009 purchase of Sun Microsystems and is reportedly asking for about $1 billion in damages. In addition to the patent claims, Oracle also alleges that Android violates its Java copyright. In court filings, Oracle claims that a computer programming language is copyrightable. Google maintains that it is not.
Now after hundreds of legal filings involving more than 75 attorneys, countless headlines, unimaginable legal fees and one angry rant by Google’s chief legal officer, the trial is set to begin. Judge Alsup’s reminder was the 911th court docket entry leading up to the main event.
Michael Dergosits, an attorney with patent law firm Dergosits & Noah, says that number of filings isn’t out of the ordinary for a trial like this. But he doesn’t buy Oracle’s copyright argument. “Yes, you can copyright A Tale of Two Cities written in English,” he tells Wired. (A Tale of Two Cities is now in the public domain, but you get the point.) “But does that mean you can copyright every word in the English language?”
Last week, Judge Alsup asked both Oracle and Google to take a firm stand on whether a computer language was copyrightable.
“Judges are always looking for tools they can use to manage the complexity of the case,” says Dergosits. “If he can get these parties to take a similar view on an issue then that’s perhaps not an issue he needs to decide.”
But predictably, Oracle and Google disagreed. Oracle reiterated its belief that a programming language is copyrightable, noting “the most analogous case law, general copyright principles, and the statutory purposes of the Copyright Act support protection.”
Google was more direct. “No, computer programming languages are not copyrightable,” read its brief. “Google has never taken any other position.”
We’ll see if the court sees it that same way. In the meantime, what do you think about this issue? Do you side with Google or do you side with Oracle?
Become a member to take advantage of more features, like commenting and voting.
Register or sign in today!