Judge scolds attorneys in Oracle vs. Google patent trial

May 21, 2012 by Glenn Chapman
The judge presiding over a patent trial pitting Oracle against Google scolded rival attorneys on Monday as deliberating jurors grappled with subtleties of references in computer software code.

The judge presiding over a patent trial pitting Oracle against Google scolded rival attorneys on Monday as deliberating jurors grappled with subtleties of references in computer software code.

US William Alsup's patience was tried as and lawyers argued opposite responses to questions focused on a distinction that could shift the verdict.

In notes sent to the judge, the jury asked if numbers are used in code to indicate where to get data but reach a symbol "downstream" in a program is it a numeric or symbolic reference.

Oracle is accusing Google of copying the way Java software uses symbolic references for certain actions in Android code for smartphones and .

Google's defense includes contending it used numbers, not symbols, in Android code.

Predictably, Google lawyers were adamant the jury be told such references are numeric, while Oracle attorneys want to look at them as symbolic.

"I don't agree with either of you," Alsup said after silently mulling the opposing arguments as lawyers waited expectantly.

"So, I will give my own instruction to the jury and you can all preserve your positions for appeal," he continued.

"I'll do my best; you lawyers aren't going to agree on anything."

Alsup brought the jurors in and told them that numeric references don't change into symbolic references because of what happens later in but to be mindful before concluding a reference is numeric at all.

"It doesn't get transmogrified into something else on account of what happens downstream," Alsup said of a numeric reference in instructions.

"But how you determine if it is a numeric reference in the first place, that is an important question."

Oracle is accusing Google of copying the way Java software uses symbolic references for certain actions in Android code for smartphones and tablet computers. Google's defense includes contending it used numbers, not symbols, in Android code.

Alsup then sent jurors back to continue their fifth day of deliberations in the patent phase of the .

The judge then lashed out in what appeared to be frustration.

"I hope both sides learned something from this about patent cases," Alsup said after jurors left the courtroom.

"It is not as easy as you started to think when you brought this lawsuit or started defending this lawsuit," he continued, added that the 'brilliant' ideas lawyers had in strategy sessions were undone by the realities of trial.

"I am pointing my fingers at both of you," the judge said, doing just that. "Whoever loses on this too bad; you will have to take it up with the federal circuit (appeals court)."

Google wants a new trial on the copyright portion of the legal battle being fought with Oracle in San Francisco federal court.

In the first phase of the trial, jurors ruled that Android operating system violated copyrights but deadlocked when it came to the pivotal question of whether it constituted "fair use" that made it acceptable.

If Google's use of copyrighted Java application programming interfaces (APIs) in Android was fair use, Oracle would deserve no damages from the Mountain View, California-based Internet firm under the law.

Google subsequently filed a motion asking Alsup to declare a mistrial in the copyright phase of the trial and have both questions presented to a new jury in a retrial.

Alsup is presiding over a second phase of the trial devoted to claims by Oracle that Google violated Java patents in Android software.

Oracle accused Google of infringing on Java computer programming language patents and copyrights Oracle obtained when it bought Java inventor Sun Microsystems in a $7.4 billion deal in 2009.

Google has denied the claims and said it believes mobile phone makers and other users of its open-source Android operating system are entitled to use the Java technology in dispute.

The Internet titan unveiled the free Android operating system two years before Oracle bought Sun.

Before breaking off deliberations on Monday jurors sent another note, this one hinting that they were having trouble reaching agreement on whether Google was infringing.

"You are basically asking me 'Judge, what is the answer here?'," Alsup told the jury. "That is where the jury comes in."

With the jury gone, Alsup advised attorneys to think about to do if jurors couldn't reach he unanimous decision required by law for a verdict.

"It we have a hung jury on these issues, you all should be thinking about what our next steps are," Alsup said.

Deliberations will continue on Tuesday.

Explore further: Samsung removes logo on smartphones in Japan

Related Stories

Google violated copyright, but no damages: jury

May 07, 2012

A jury ruled Monday that Google violated copyrights owned by Oracle Corp. for the Android mobile platform, but failed to agree on whether damages should be awarded in the high-profile trial.

Recommended for you

Germany still has some way to go to 'smart factories'

6 hours ago

Collaborative robots and intelligent machinery may have wowed the crowds at this year's Hannover Messe, but experts see German industry as having some way to go towards incorporating them on factory floors ...

Taiwan factory workers win $18 mn over cancer deaths

Apr 17, 2015

Workers from a factory in Taiwan which leeched toxic chemicals they say resulted in 200 deaths from cancer and more than 1,000 other cases of the disease won a Tw$564.45 million ($18 million) payout from US electronics company ...

Court monitor: Apple antitrust cooperation has 'declined'

Apr 17, 2015

Apple Inc.'s cooperation with efforts to improve its compliance with antitrust laws after a federal judge concluded it colluded with electronic book publishers to raise prices five years ago took on an "adversarial tone" ...

User comments : 1

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Lurker2358
not rated yet May 21, 2012
Wow.
I hadn't realized numerical or symbolic references were patented material.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.