The longest-lasting and most staggering case in the software industry (Google vs. Oracle) began its official hearing in the United States Supreme Court yesterday.
Why is it called a shocking case?
Because it’s rare in history for one company to force another company to pay nearly a hundred billion dollars, and this case has been going on for 10 years after many twists and turns.
Perhaps this case is the reason why Google’s stock has significantly lagged behind FAAMNT this year.
As a follow-up to the “Java War” series of articles (link), I would like to offer some additional insights.
Friends who have read that article know that I believe this war is Ellison’s revenge for Jobs, so it is difficult for both sides to reconcile.
Microsoft and IBM, among other software giants, have sided with Google to avoid an endless legal battle over this case.
The film and music industries, which place great emphasis on copyright, are siding with Oracle and believe that stealing is simply stealing and that trying to argue otherwise is useless.
The music industry has always been infuriated by the practice of not paying royalties for only singing a part of a song on the internet.
The passing of Chief Justice Ginsburg has added another variable to this case.
One, Link to heading
Google has used 11,330 lines of code from Java API interface in Android without paying any licensing fees.
Google argues, “We are using it reasonably, and do not need to pay.”
According to the decision of the Federal Court of Appeals, the cost is 9 billion US dollars because Android has made Google earn a lot of money.
It is estimated that Google now wants to swallow alive the lawyers who negotiated the Java licensing agreement back then.
Kinsberg is the most devout protector of intellectual property. She could probably even protect toilet paper that’s used to write APIs, let alone APIs themselves.
Two, Link to heading
In “The War of Java,” it was stated that the Supreme Court of the United States had sought the opinion of the Department of Justice on whether or not to take on this case.
The United States Department of Justice is equivalent to the Prosecutors Office in China, meaning it represents the government as a lawyer.
As is well-known, the relationship between Trump and Ellison is not ordinary. Oracle’s seizure of TikTok from Microsoft is one example.
How should I put it? Microsoft definitely wants to do business with China, but Oracle has been marginalized in China.
The US Department of Justice stated, “We support Oracle and believe that all code has intellectual property rights. Please reject the appeal.”
However, the Supreme Court has decided to accept this case.
Three, Link to heading
The Supreme Court of the United States does not accept ordinary cases; its principle of acceptance is to create precedents in order to solve certain common problems.
Respected Judge Kingsberg was initially expected to rule in favor of Oracle.
But the situation has changed now, and there are uncertainties as to whether Trump can successfully appoint a new Supreme Court justice before he leaves office.
If the verdict is 4:4, the software industry may breathe a sigh of relief: Oracle walks away with 9 billion yuan while there is no decisive precedent.
Four, Link to heading
From my perspective, Google had no other choice but to use Java back then: time was of the essence in order to catch up with the iPhone.
From the perspective of the outcome, it is also true that Android’s rapid catch-up is closely related to the Java virtual machine model and the vast developer community.
At that time, Google did not have time to rebuild these APIs using a clean room approach. Perhaps at that time, Google did not anticipate that Android would become one of its most important traffic gateways, and negotiations with Sun were too stingy.
Oracle bone scripts consider APIs as the table of contents of a book, and it is evident that the table of contents is protected.
If Google wins this case, copying ten thousand lines of code would not be considered copying. From the perspective of respecting copyright, it would also have harmful implications.
Five, Link to heading
During the hearing on the 7th, several judges’ questioning showed that they were still very perplexed about this case. They attempted to use ordering food and listening to music to understand whether the API should be protected or not.
It is said that the judge of the appellate court specifically studied Java programming for this case, and as a result, ruled in favor of Oracle.
One of the major controversies in this case is whether the judge should only base their judgment on copyright law principles or should also consider the industry consequences that may result from the ruling beforehand.
After becoming the Grand Secretary of the state of Lu (equivalent to the Chief Justice), Confucius’ method of adjudication was to try and recreate the circumstances of the parties involved, based on traditional customs and ethics rather than written law.
We wait and see whether the direction of the United States Supreme Court, as some commentators say, is shifting towards conservatism.