We're hearing via The Verge that Judge William Alsup has just handed down his decision on the copyrightability of Oracle's 37 Java API's, asserted by Oracle as having been infringed by Google in the Android operating system. This is probably the most important issue of the entire case. While a jury decided that Google did infringe Oracle's APIs as asserted by Oracle, that decision hinged on the assumption that the APIs were in fact copyrightable in the way Oracle had insisted they were.
Google and Oracle have been going at it for weeks now over both patent and copyright infringement claims made by the latter company. At least one issue is settled, though, as the jury on the case has decided that Google did not infringe any of Oracle's patents with Android. This is only a small part of Oracle's assault on Google. The larger issue is on the matter of copyright infringement, but at least on the patent issue, Google seems to be in the clear.
Update: We've received an official statement from an HTC spokesperson on the situation with US Customs, and it basically confirms what was said to the Taiwanese stock exchange. Here it is:
“Each imported HTC model must be reviewed by Customs and will be released once Customs officials have completed the inspection. Some models have gone through inspection and been released to our carrier customers. We don't have the status of each specific device model at this time, but we are working closely with Customs.
According to an exclusion order issued by the ITC, some of Motorola Mobility's smartphone devices are in violation of four claims in a Microsoft patent related to scheduling meetings in a calendar. The specifics really aren't important - basically, the ITC found that Motorola infringed a Microsoft patent related to mobile software for creating and sending meeting invitations.
Motorola and Google had argued that an exclusionary order banning the import of offending Motorola devices wasn't in the public interest, but the judge didn't buy it.
We reported last night that, due to an ITC order on an Apple patent infringement claim, at least some of HTC's One X and EVO 4G LTE smartphones had been halted at shipping ports by US Customs.
The implications of this for the EVO 4G LTE just got worse, as Sprint has been forced to concede that the planned May 18th launch will have to be delayed until the customs investigation is completed.
US Customs has halted at least some shipments of the HTC One X and EVO 4G LTE (presumably at the Port of Los Angeles), as a result of an earlier ITC order won by Apple over a patent lawsuit for "data tapping" (context-sensitive text-based actions) in the browser and messaging apps on some HTC phones.
These features, HTC contends, have been removed from the One X and EVO 4G LTE, and HTC is "confident" that it is in compliance with the ruling:
You've probably already read headlines in the last hour or two proclaiming that Google has "lost" its copyright case against Oracle, and in the strictest sense of the word, it has. Google lost on a number of counts, including the most important one, question one in the jury instructions. It also lost on a count involving nine lines of code that have long-since been removed from Android.
The first question, though, asked the jurors whether Google's use of 37 Java API packages, taken as a group, constituted an infringement of Oracle's copyrighted works.
After what was a pretty obvious application of the ICANN anti-squatting policy, it seems Google has now gained control of GooglePlay.com from an ad-serving Japanese squatter. Google filed a complaint under ICANN anti-squatting regulations, and after the case's short stint at the National Arbitration Forum (a non-court but legally binding decision-making body in the US), Google now shows as the registrant of GooglePlay.com.
A quick 'whois' of the domain yields the following:
Two weeks ago, the judge in Apple's case against Motorola ordered Google and Moto to hand over details on Android development. Naturally, Motorola appealed, and managed to change Judge Posner's mind. While the company isn't getting away scot-free (or at least, not yet), he did say that "[Apple's] motion is vague and overbroad and Motorola's objections are persuasive." In other words, Apple needs to tone down their request and make sure things are relevant and specific (or in my words, "Apple needs to stop requesting all the shit they can think of").
Seeking damages for California residents who have purchased defective Android apps and were disallowed a refund, Android users Dodd Harris and Stephen Sabatino are suing Google under the pretext that the search giant's 15-minute refund window is unfair.
The pair claim that Google's pocketing of a 30% commission on defective apps and denying a refund after 15 minutes is wrong, using the practices of other app stores (those run by Amazon and Apple) to illustrate their point.