Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Oracle Am., Inc. v. Google Inc.

United States District Court for the Northern District of California

July 22, 2011, Decided; July 22, 2011, Filed

No. C 10-03561 WHA

Opinion

 [*1112]  ORDER GRANTING IN PART MOTION TO STRIKE DAMAGE REPORT OF PLAINTIFF EXPERT IAIN COCKBURN

INTRODUCTION

In this patent and copyright infringement action involving features of Java and Android, defendant moves to exclude the report and testimony of plaintiff's damages expert. For the following reasons, the motion is largely Granted.

STATEMENT

The claims asserted in this action relate to the Java software platform,  [**5] which was described in the claim construction order (Dkt. No. 137). The seven asserted patents purportedly cover inventions that improve the efficiency and security of Java.  [*1113]  The copyright claim concerns the allegedly expressive elements of source code for Java class libraries. Java was developed by Sun Microsystems, Inc., in the 1990s, and it has become one of the world's most popular software platforms. By using a "virtual machine," Java enabled software developers to write programs that were able to run on a variety of different types of computer hardware. Java is commonly used on desktop computers to facilitate compatibility with application programs distributed through the internet. A more recent "micro edition" of the Java platform known as Java ME is used in mobile computing devices.

The accused product in this action is Android, a software platform that was designed specifically for mobile devices and that competes with Java in that market. Both Java and Android are complex platforms comprising virtual machines, programming languages, development and testing kits, software libraries, and other elements. Significantly, only part of Java and part of Android are said to embody the  [**6] asserted claims. For example, the virtual machine concept underlying Java's "write once, run anywhere" solution is not covered by the asserted claims and indeed was part of the prior art that predated Java. And, it is undisputed that the Java programming language is in the public domain and anyone was free to use it without charge, as Android does. The asserted patent claims purport to disclose only incremental improvements to the efficiency and security of the Java system. For its part, Android uses the Linux kernel and has many non-Java elements as well.

Google acquired Android, Inc., in August 2005 and soon began discussing the possibility of taking a Java license from Sun for use in Android. The Android project sought to include a virtual machine that used Java technology in an open-source format — but for mobile applications. Historically, Sun never "refused to license any of the Java technologies," and "the proportion of total Java licensing costs as against total software revenues [for Sun's Java licensees was] de minimis" (Weingaertner Exh. H at 64-65). Sun, however, seemed reluctant to authorize an open-source implementation of Java technology, possibly for fear that it would  [**7] decrease other Java licensing revenue (Norton Exh. D).

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

798 F. Supp. 2d 1111 *; 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80280 **

ORACLE AMERICA, INC., Plaintiff, v. GOOGLE INC., Defendant.

Subsequent History: Later proceeding at Oracle Am., Inc. v. Google Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80088 (N.D. Cal., July 22, 2011)

Prior History: Oracle Am., Inc. v. Google Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79465 (N.D. Cal., July 21, 2011)

CORE TERMS

infringement, negotiation, hypothetical, patent, license, bargaining, royalty, platform, fragmentation, invention, patentee, holder, injunction, software, mobile, non-infringing, advertising, technology, calculate, downward