Google fights Oracle, did not think so dirty!

Oracle and Google have returned to court, a dispute that began in 2010, when Oracle first sued that "Google uses 37 Java APIs (application interfaces) in the Android operating system." The original verdict in the case was in favor of Google, but the case was reversed after being submitted to the Court of Appeal, and the case was then appealed to the United States Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court's attitude was inadmissible. The lawsuit is now back to the original U.S. District Court, which could generate $9 billion in revenue for Oracle. a new round of confrontation This time, the debate between the two sides is no longer focused on whether Google's use of Java APIs in Android is infringing on Oracle's copyrights, but whether Google's code is a fair-use category. Oracle's lawyers and witnesses are also trying to portray the company as a defender of free, open-source software, although Oracle is lashing out at 4 legal provisions on fair use. In this case, however, it is hard for Oracle to reverse its image, because the company is first to open the source. Many computer scientists oppose Oracle's approach, saying the company's attitude will cause far-reaching damage to the open source community. But Oracle's co-CEO, Savra Caze Safra Catz, testified in Monday and Tuesday that restricting his software to "walled gardens" was Google's approach, not Oracle's. Google says that Java-based open source features have made the Android team take advantage of the Java API. But Katz says the only way to keep Java's long-running philosophy of "one development, anywhere" is to make sure the language is not interfered with by intruders such as Google. In the eyes of Oracle, Google has turned Java into a non-compatible form in Android. "Pretty" rhetoric. Katz this week on behalf of Oracle on his own side of the view, now Katz and Mark Hurd Mark Hurd together as Oracle CEO position. She said Oracle's acquisition of Sun Microsystems in 2009 was largely to protect Java and ensure the fair and open use of the language. When Sun's share price fell in the middle of the 00 's, she began to worry about Java's fate, when Oracle was using Java to develop software, and Katz feared that "if sun had problems, then the programming language used by Oracle would be problematic," says Katz. ” So, to avoid Java fading or falling into the hands of rivals, Oracle is starting to try to acquire Java. According to Katz, Oracle's initial goal was not to win a portion of Java and Sun's software business, but the proposal was rejected. Later, it was said that IBM might acquire Sun, and that the company's hardware business was included in the agreement. When Oracle returned to the negotiating table, he came up with $7.4 billion more than the IBM takeover bid of $7 billion, which brought the entire Sun company into the bag. At the time of the acquisition, Oracle CEO Larry Ellison said Java was "the most important software asset we have ever acquired". Kazbon the message again in court in Monday, saying she suggested the acquisition to Ellison and plans to continue to develop Java within the company after acquiring Java. "We plan to invest in Java, unite the Java community and develop new versions of Java in the future," says Katz. ” Katz believes that after the acquisition, Google's use of Java in the Android system has become a topic of internal discussion within Oracle. She said Sun's former CEO Jonasan Schwarz Jonathan Schwartz told Oracle that he had negotiated with Google to ask Google to buy licenses when using Java. (Mr. Schwartz testified on behalf of Google in this case.) ） However, after Oracle's acquisition of Sun in early 2010, the impact of Android on Java openness has been too big to reverse, Katz said. She points out that the entire Java developer community is in Split, with some developers turning to the Android platform, leading to a limited openness in Java. Using Java, says Katz, "they can run all the time with a single program, but when you're developing on Android, it won't work anywhere but Android." ” a violent comeback. In a question to Katz, Google's lawyers made the counter-attack, "Android is a free and open platform, and open platform, so it seems strange to think of Android as a development restriction." They say that Oracle does not fully understand the openness of Java, and that its managers are either not ready to manage an open source platform or deliberately restricting the use of java. Google's lawyers have questioned Katz about Oracle's own plans to develop smartphones, and Oracle has considered the plan shortly after acquiring Sun, but it has not been implemented in the end. Google's lawyers showed an internal slideshow of Oracle's development of mobile phones, showing: "There is limited expertise within Oracle to make smart decisions." ” Google points out that Oracle decided to sue after it failed to develop its own smartphone. E-mails between Mr. Ellison and Alphabet Executive chairman Eric Schmidt Eric Schmidt showed that they had met a few months before Oracle filed a lawsuit. Google also referred to Mr. Ellison's statement at the JavaOne developer Conference that he was happy that Google was using Java, as Mr. Ellison said: "I think we'll see more and more Java devices, some of them from our Google friends." ” No matter what kind of friendship there is between Google and Oracle executives, it is no longer there. Katz said Google's general counsel, Kent Walker Kent Walker, contacted her in March 2012 to discuss the lawsuit. According to Katz, Walker said: "Google is a very special company, the old rules do not apply to us." ” And Katz responded to an old rule: "You can't steal." ” Katz said that Google's infringement caused Oracle to lose $ hundreds of millions of. The court hearings on the lawsuit will continue this week and will end early next week. This address: http://www.linuxprobe.com/oracle-vs-google-android.html

Google fights Oracle, did not think so dirty!