Google wants Oracle Android patent lawsuit dismissed

Google wants to dismiss Oracle Android lawsuit and invalidate said patents.
Google wants to dismiss Oracle Android lawsuit and invalidate said patents.

Google has already called Oracle’s patent lawsuit over Android “baseless” but the search giant is now asking the courts to dismiss the lawsuit and asked the judge to declare the disputed patents invalid.

Oracle sued Google because it said that Android infringes upon 7 patents it owns related to Java. Oracle spent billions purchasing Sun to gain those patents and there’s speculation that part of the allure of the company came with the potential to go after the wealthy search giant.

“It’s disappointing that after years of supporting open source, Oracle turned around to attack not just Android, but the entire open source Java community with vague software patent claims,” a Google spokesman told the Wall Street Journal.

We’re not patent lawyers here at IntoMobile but we do know that the smartphone space is the future of computing, so all of the tech giants want to carve out their space. That’s why we’re seeing an explosion of mobile patent lawsuits.

The Google mobile platform has been a target of several high-profile legal attacks and some would argue that these only came about once Android started making a dent in the market share of competitors.

Along with the Oracle suit, Apple is going after HTC over its Android phones. Microsoft is also suing Motorola over its phones with the little, green robot.

Microsoft’s attack is kind of devious in a Gordon Gecko way because it appears to be going after manufacturers who used to use Windows Mobile. It signed a licensing agreement with HTC and one with Motorola will probably follow soon – It looks like Steve Ballmer’s company will be making money if these guys use Windows Phone 7 or Android and that’s not a bad monetary stream.

We’ll definitely be following this one and let you know how this impacts your Android handset.

[Via The Wall Street Journal]

  • leigh

    Call me crazy, but I think it is good idea to go after a monetary stream when it comes from people who are infringing your patents. It is very logical to go after someone after they have reaped the benefits, and not before, because their pockets will need to deepter. And BTW, one can’t sue a company for offering something that infringes that is free, because, first, there is no proof, and second, there is no licesne revenue to be gained there.

    The same thing will likely happen to Chrome if Google doesn’t start thinking about IP.

  • Anonymous

    The software (lines of source code, lines of a book but with abstract ideas like maths that are not pattentable, becase they are abstracts ideas) is very similar to a written song. Now imagine that each musical note of your great song is patented. The funny thing is that you create the song and you never copied anything in the 2 years that takes you to create it, but at the end you can´t play it because someone else in 5 minutes patent the concept of a musical note. The only thing that this person needs to do is use a very cool title like: “Noise event moduled by frecuency” or something like that and WUALA!! you create something that already exist, but with another complicated name. The problem is that this cool “new thing” is just a musical note or in other words a noise. There are around like 3 millions of software patents and the worst thing is that a lot of them infringe other patents. They are patenting IDEAS, that in most cases takes 5 minutes to create them and anybody could have the same idea. Do you think that’s fair?. Just imagine if they had pattented the Calculus in the past for 20 years, where would we be now, if Newton had not been able to use Calculus, becase Lewis first thought on it and protected with a patent. THATS WHY ABSTRACT IDEAS ARE NOT PATTENTABLE!!

  • Anonymous

    The software (lines of source code, lines of a book but with abstract ideas like maths that are not pattentable, becase they are abstracts ideas) is very similar to a written song. Now imagine that each musical note of your great song is patented. The funny thing is that you create the song and you never copied anything in the 2 years that takes you to create it, but at the end you can´t play it because someone else in 5 minutes patent the concept of a musical note. The only thing that this person needs to do is use a very cool title like: “Noise event moduled by frecuency” or something like that and WUALA!! you create something that already exist, but with another complicated name. The problem is that this cool “new thing” is just a musical note or in other words a noise. There are around like 3 millions of software patents and the worst thing is that a lot of them infringe other patents. They are patenting IDEAS, that in most cases takes 5 minutes to create them and anybody could have the same idea. Do you think that’s fair?. Just imagine if they had pattented the Calculus in the past for 20 years, where would we be now, if Newton had not been able to use Calculus, becase Lewis first thought on it and protected with a patent. THATS WHY ABSTRACT IDEAS ARE NOT PATTENTABLE!!

Back to top ▴