Google Calls for Mistrial After Jury Says Android Stole From Java

A jury has ruled that Google infringed on Oracle’s copyrights in building a new version of the Java platform for its Android mobile operating system, but it was unable to reach a decision on whether this infringement was acceptable under the law.

With this paradoxical partial decision, the jury has left the case very much in the air, and Google has already moved for a mistrial.
On Monday, as the Google-Oracle case entered its fourth week, a jury ruled that Oracle has proven that Google infringed the overall structure, sequence, and organization of copyrighted works of 37 APIs used by the Java platform. In building Android, Google created a new version of the Java platform known as the Dalvik virtual machine, and this mimicked the Java APIs, or application programming interfaces, which are essentially a way for a Java application to talk to the platform.
But the jury was unable to reach a decision on whether Google’s Java clone constituted “fair use.” A fair use decision would let Google off the hook.
After receiving the verdict, Judge William Alsup told the jury it would not have to answer the fair-use question, and Google immediately asked that the judge declare a mistrail, arguing that precedent says you can’t decide on infringement without deciding on fair use. Google will file a brief and expand on this argument tomorrow.
“We appreciate the jury’s efforts, and know that fair use and infringement are two sides of the same coin,” reads a canned statement from Google sent to Wired. “The core issue is whether the APIs here are copyrightable, and that’s for the court to decide. We expect to prevail on this issue and Oracle’s other claims.”
But in its statement to the press, Oracle treated the decision like a victory. “Oracle, the nine million Java developers, and the entire Java community thank the jury for their verdict in this phase of the case,” the statement read. “The overwhelming evidence demonstrated that Google knew it needed a license and that its unauthorized fork of Java in Android shattered Java’s central write once run anywhere principle. Every major commercial enterprise — except Google — has a license for Java and maintains compatibility to run across all computing platforms.”
The jury also said that Google infringed a particular part of Oracle’s Java code: the “rangeCheck” method in the files “TimSort.java” and “ComparableTimSort.Java.” But it decided that Google did not infringe on Oracle’s Java documentation, two other portions of Oracle’s code (the source code in seven “Impl.java” files and the one “ACL” file), or the English-language comments in a third portion of code (“CodeSourceTest.java” and “CollectionCertStoreParameters Test.java”).
Oracle sued Google in August of 2010 after purchasing Java maker Sun Microsystems, claiming that Google infringed on its Java-related patents and copyrights in building Android. Oracle accused Google of infringing maliciously and without regard for Sun’s licensing agreements and the intellectual property that Oracle now owns.
The case has been closely watched because of Oracle’s claim that Google violated copyright on 37 of its application’s programming interfaces. APIs define standard ways for two pieces of software to talk to each other, and open-source developers generally consider it fair game to write programs that can connect via other people’s APIs. Linux, for example, contains code written to the POSIX (Portable Operating System Interface) APIs.

Photo: Ariel Zambelich/Wired

Because Android has been a runaway hit for Google, the case could send waves through the tech world. Google allows anyone to download and work with Android’s code for free, and it’s been used in everything from smartphones to microwaves to cars. At this point, it’s not possible to know how hardware markers and coders will be affected by the verdict until damages are assessed. Before the jury reached its verdict, Alsup noted: “That’s a problem I haven’t had in past cases.” Right now, Oracle is seeking roughly $1.1 billion, but may argue for licensing rights as well.
The Android operating system is most widely known for its use on mobile devices. Amazon’s Kindle Fire, Samsung’s Galaxy and HTC’s Flyer use Android, among many others, to power their tablets. During closing arguments, Oracle attorney Mike Jacobs said there were 750,000 Android activations on mobile devices each day. In February, comScore, an analytics outfit, reported that Android had just crested 50 percent of the smartphone market, a 17 percent jump since February of 2011.
Last week, just before the jury began deliberations, Judge William Alsup defined the boundaries of the case, saying that copyright protects the “expression of ideas” but not a procedures, processes, systems, methods of operation, concepts, principles, or discoveries. For the purposes of this case, he said, Oracle’s copyrights cover the “structure, sequence, and organization” of the actual software code that underpins the Java platform.
But it seems that Alsup may change his stance on this.
Throughout the trial, Google had tried to poke holes in Oracle’s accusations, saying that the codes were very different from one another — Android has about 15.3 million lines; Oracle’s recent Java version has about 4.7 million — and that they were only similar in their “method signatures,” code that defines the inputs and outputs for part of a computer program. Google also presented e-mail evidence that when it built Dalvik, it went to great lengths to find engineers that wouldn’t be influenced by previous Java programming work. Out of those 15.3 million lines of Android code, Oracle could only accuse Google of copying nine.
“We at Google have always believed that the best kind of software is generally open,” said former CEO Eric Schmidt during his testimony.
Taking the stand for Google, Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz said that as Android was being built, he didn’t like it, but that he wasn’t going to stop it. Sun was taking the longer view that more developers using Java-based languages would benefit his company and help them break up the grip Microsoft had on the office software market, according to Schwartz.
“We wanted to build the biggest tent and invite as many people as possible,” Schwartz said. “You have open APIs and compete on implementations.”
Today’s partial verdict only covers the “copyright” portion of the case. Now comes the “patent phase,” where the tech giants will argue over two patents Google allegedly violated when building Android. Regardless of whether Google loses in this second section, a “damages” phase will follow where the two sides will argue over what exactly Google owes Oracle.

Oracle Google jury form 05-07-20