Google won the battle against Oracle in Java The row – IDG.se

For years the quarrel going on between the two IT giants, between the lawyers and the news media. Was it okay by Google to, without paying license fees, use of 37 Java APIs in Android? Obviously, Google said, it is within the scope of fair use (fair use). Not at all, claiming Oracle and called party 72 billion in damages.

After tough negotiations, and closing arguments in court, the jury has now come to a decision. Google is freed completely from allegations of copyright infringement when they used 11,500 lines of Java code in the Android operating system. The copying of parts of the Java platform is to ensure that reasonable use, writes IDG News. One new feature that learns received with joy among developers who often relies on free access to APIs for developing third party services.

The jury was unanimous in its decision but this does not mean that the last word in the conflict between the two companies. Oracle’s lawyers were quick to announce that they will appeal the ruling. According to them, there are legal grounds to review the case again and question marks that need to be sorted out.

“We are confident that Google developed Android by illegally copying core Java technology to hurry into the mobile market. Oracle took this to court to put an end to Google’s unlawful conduct, “said Dorian Daley, one of the company lawyers.

Google has asserted its right to refer to the wording of fair use. Making it possible to use creative works, where Java is counted, in certain, limited circumstances. Normally used for satire and for training purposes.

The jury was primarily four factors to consider. Among other things, the use of just being a simple processing or if they created something new that significantly differed from the original code? Or the extent to which Android damaged the Java market. According to Google, it was rather Suns failures that made them entered the smartphone land spirit, not Android’s fault.

Since this was a civil trial where the burden of proof on Google slightly lower. It was enough that most evidence pointed to reasonable use. Had there been a criminal process would have required evidence to put the question beyond a reasonable doubt.