check it out, everybody is making smart phone, but I prefer stupid phone myself# Stock
k*4
1 楼
04-17) 14:13 PDT -- Google's Android operating system makes improper use of
Oracle software, billionaire founder Larry Ellison told jurors Tuesday
morning in a San Francisco court room.
Ellison appeared as the first witness in his company's effort to win damages
for what Oracle calls Google's infringement of copyrights and patents
related to the Java programming language. Java was developed by Sun
Microsystems, which Oracle bought in January 2010 for $7 billion.The trial,
which began Monday in U.S. District Court, offered the unusual sight of two
prominent CEOs testifying about their companies' internal deliberations.
For his part, Ellison disclosed that his company considered purchasing
Research in Motion or Palm to help it build a smart phone that would compete
with offerings from Apple and Google. Oracle abandoned the idea without
making an offer for either company.
Google CEO Larry Page, in a videotaped deposition that was played for the
jury, answered questions from an Oracle attorney about his interpretation of
a staff report suggesting Google "must" acquire a license to use Java
software in Android. Page was called to the stand later in the day, but his
testimony was limited to a few technical questions. He is expected to resume
being examined Wednesday.
The lawsuit originated in August 2010, when Oracle alleged that the Android
operating system Google developed for smart phones and tablets made improper
use of technologies covered by seven patents owned by Oracle. The Redwood
Shores company originally demanded as much as $6.1 billion in damages from
Google.
The scope of the case has since narrowed considerably, as five of the seven
patents Oracle asserted against Google have been ruled invalid by the U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office. A sixth has been ruled invalid on a preliminary
basis.
That leaves one patent officially in dispute. The patent describes a method
for building Java applications more efficiently, according to the website
Ars Technica, which published an overview of the case.
The patent office ruled that the method could be patented, but Google denies
that Android infringes on it.
In his opening statement, Google attorney Robert Van Nest made a four-
pronged argument to jurors: that Sun gave Java to the public freely; that
Google built Android using free technologies; that Sun approved of Google's
use of Android; and that Google makes fair use of the technologies inside
Android.
Van Nest accused Oracle of greed.
"They want to share in Android's profits without having done a thing to
bring it about," he said.
But Ellison argued that Oracle was merely defending its intellectual
property.
"Oracle spends about $5 billion a year on research and development," he said
. "Ninety percent of that is spent on creating, designing and programming
computer software. If people could copy our software - in other words,
create cheap knockoffs of our products - we wouldn't get paid for our
engineering and we wouldn't be able to continue to invest at the rate we
invest."
If Oracle wins the case, it could obtain royalties on each Android device
Google sells, causing Android devices to become more expensive. It could
also diminish enthusiasm for manufacturing Android devices among Google's
partners, given the multiple patent disputes the operating system has
generated.
The trial has been scheduled for eight weeks.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/04/17/BU6C1O4JLP.DTL#ixzz1sLkOFihr
Oracle software, billionaire founder Larry Ellison told jurors Tuesday
morning in a San Francisco court room.
Ellison appeared as the first witness in his company's effort to win damages
for what Oracle calls Google's infringement of copyrights and patents
related to the Java programming language. Java was developed by Sun
Microsystems, which Oracle bought in January 2010 for $7 billion.The trial,
which began Monday in U.S. District Court, offered the unusual sight of two
prominent CEOs testifying about their companies' internal deliberations.
For his part, Ellison disclosed that his company considered purchasing
Research in Motion or Palm to help it build a smart phone that would compete
with offerings from Apple and Google. Oracle abandoned the idea without
making an offer for either company.
Google CEO Larry Page, in a videotaped deposition that was played for the
jury, answered questions from an Oracle attorney about his interpretation of
a staff report suggesting Google "must" acquire a license to use Java
software in Android. Page was called to the stand later in the day, but his
testimony was limited to a few technical questions. He is expected to resume
being examined Wednesday.
The lawsuit originated in August 2010, when Oracle alleged that the Android
operating system Google developed for smart phones and tablets made improper
use of technologies covered by seven patents owned by Oracle. The Redwood
Shores company originally demanded as much as $6.1 billion in damages from
Google.
The scope of the case has since narrowed considerably, as five of the seven
patents Oracle asserted against Google have been ruled invalid by the U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office. A sixth has been ruled invalid on a preliminary
basis.
That leaves one patent officially in dispute. The patent describes a method
for building Java applications more efficiently, according to the website
Ars Technica, which published an overview of the case.
The patent office ruled that the method could be patented, but Google denies
that Android infringes on it.
In his opening statement, Google attorney Robert Van Nest made a four-
pronged argument to jurors: that Sun gave Java to the public freely; that
Google built Android using free technologies; that Sun approved of Google's
use of Android; and that Google makes fair use of the technologies inside
Android.
Van Nest accused Oracle of greed.
"They want to share in Android's profits without having done a thing to
bring it about," he said.
But Ellison argued that Oracle was merely defending its intellectual
property.
"Oracle spends about $5 billion a year on research and development," he said
. "Ninety percent of that is spent on creating, designing and programming
computer software. If people could copy our software - in other words,
create cheap knockoffs of our products - we wouldn't get paid for our
engineering and we wouldn't be able to continue to invest at the rate we
invest."
If Oracle wins the case, it could obtain royalties on each Android device
Google sells, causing Android devices to become more expensive. It could
also diminish enthusiasm for manufacturing Android devices among Google's
partners, given the multiple patent disputes the operating system has
generated.
The trial has been scheduled for eight weeks.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/04/17/BU6C1O4JLP.DTL#ixzz1sLkOFihr