Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> Business and Technology Law

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Intellectual Property Law

: Business and Technology Law

Google Comes Under Fire from Oracle in Patent Lawsuit

By Stephanie Robinson

ADVERTISEMENTS

On August 12, 2010, Oracle sued Google in U.S. District Court in San Francisco based on claims that Google?s Android operating system constitutes an infringement of Oracle?s patents and copyrights related to the Java software development platform. Oracle owns the intellectual property rights in Java following its acquisition of Sun Microsystems earlier in 2010, and in its lawsuit, it alleges that a Google-developed technology called Dalvik, which is integrated in the Android O/S, is a competitor to Java that infringes the various patents and the copyright in Java. In light of the massive resources Oracle and Google each are able to bring to bear in this fight, the outcome of the lawsuit is anything but certain. Google has countered that versions of Java have been licensed under open-source licenses for years and that Dalvik was developed under that kind of license. In addition, Sun Microsystems? approach to Java patent matters historically was very permissive, which may call into question Oracle?s ability now to base a patent suit on rights that arguably may have been diminished through past inaction. However, one thing that is certain is that Oracle?s lawsuit will cause ? and should cause ? many software developers to think long and hard about the advisability of any long-term plans that depend on the open availability of Java as software development platform. As this case unfolds, developers should be prepared to carefully consider whether it represents a sea-change in Java-related IP enforcement, in which case it may make sense to start identifying appropriate alternatives to Java, or whether it is merely a case of one big fish going after another big fish in an effort to reach a joint-licensing or other context-specific outcome.

Full post as published by Business and Technology Law on August 18, 2010 (boomark / email).