Always strive to learn something useful. --Sophocles

The good news is that a non-technical jury found that Google's use of Java to create Android was not infringing. Oracle has been suing Google over this for years and the jury came back after three days of deliberation and said Google was OK with what they did. Considering that Sun, who was bought out by Oracle, also thought it was OK even though Sun didn't like it, probably was a key factor.

Revealed in the testimony was that Oracle tried to develop their own phone using Java and couldn't.

I'm not a huge fan of Google. Yes, their products are pretty good, and I use their search engine, maps, and Gmail regularly. It's their original 'Don't be evil' mantra that bugs me because they monetize everything. Now, a business has to make money to survive in business, but why couldn't they be more upfront about it?

The basic standard is that if you're not paying for a service, then YOU (and your information) is the product being sold.

Oracle is, of course, going to appeal the verdict. Had Google lost, it is rumored that they could ask for as much as $9 BILLION dollars, insert your best Dr. Evil voice as needed.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/05/google-wins-trial-against-oracle-as-jury-finds-android-is-fair-use/


The bad news concerns Apple. Amongst the many lawsuits against it at any given time was one from VirnetX that claimed that Apple was infringing against its patents with its Facetime and iMessage apps. Yesterday they lost the case. VirnetX is a patent troll: they buy lots of patents, wait for a product that is vaguely similar to be successful the go crying to the East Texas courts. VirnetX claims that Apple has done irreparable harm to its brand, even though they've never produced a product and no one has heard of them outside of the patent troll game.

So Apple may have to cough up a heck of a lot of money, or possibly turn off iMessages and Facetime, which would suck in a major way and probably FINALLY! get the attention of Congress and the need for patent reform.

Me, personally, I don't use Facetime but I can appreciate the product. I use iMessages regularly, and I love the fact that my texts, which are all so sexy and top secret, are very strongly encrypted and my cell carrier can't see them since they're shunted through Apple's servers. So I would hate to see them go.

Apple is, naturally, going to appeal the decision.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/05/patent-troll-that-beat-apple-now-wants-judge-to-block-facetime-imessages/

However....

Apple just hired the co-founder of Silent Circle, Blackphone, and PGP Corp. Jon Callas is an expert when it comes to encrypted communications, so presumably he's going to beef-up Apple crypto and possibly revamp iMessages and Facetime so they're even more secure and perhaps no longer infringe on VirnetX's patents.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-encryption-callas-idUSKCN0YF2J1

"Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen has filed far-reaching patent lawsuits against Google, Apple, Yahoo, Netflix, Facebook, AOL and eBay, among others, alleging the companies violated patents owned by his now-defunct idea lab Interval Research.

The four patents at issue allegedly cover basics of online commerce, including recommending products to a user based on what they are currently looking at, and allowing readers of a news story to see other stories based on the current one. Two other patents relate to showing other information on a web page, such as news updates or stock quotes."

According to the article in the Wall Street Journal, also named in the suit are: Office Depot Inc., OfficeMax Inc., Staples Inc. and Google's YouTube

Allen is not suing Microsoft over the same issues that he's suing others for. Selective vision. AOL should just hand him the keys and let him deal with their mess, they're not going to be long for the world at the rate their user base is shrinking.

What I really hate, aside from the ability to patent software ideas, is the fact that they don't have to be implemented. A lot of people argue that you should be able to copyright software concepts and implementations, but not patent them. I think that's a lot more realistic.

There was a great comment in the Wired comments: "We are told the great American pastime is Baseball. Clearly it is litigation."

I guess I won't be returning to the Experience Music Project or the Science Fiction Hall of Fame the next time I'm in Seattle.

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/08/paul-allen-patent-lawsuit/

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703294904575385241453119382.html

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/08/27/203248/Paul-Allen-Files-Patent-Suit-Against-Apple-Google-Yahoo-Others