U.S. Supreme Court lets Oracle press case that Google copied Java in rush to make Android

“The U.S. Supreme Court let Oracle Corp. press accusations that Google Inc. developed the Android smartphone operating system by improperly copying Java programming language,” Greg Stohr reports for Bloomberg.

“Oracle, the largest database-software maker, has sought more than $1 billion in damages,” Stohr reports. “The lawsuit claims Google used Oracle’s Java code without paying because it was in a rush to create Android, now the world’s most popular smartphone platform. The case returns to a lower court.”

“Oracle asked the Supreme Court not to hear the appeal, saying its code is ‘original and highly creative,'” Stohr reports. “‘Google was free to write its own code to perform the same functions as Oracle’s,’ the company argued. ‘Instead, it plagiarized.'”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Android is a stolen product in more ways than one.

I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this. – Steve Jobs

Apple won the war by relegating Android to undesirable, unprofitable demographics.

Hopefully, the courts will fairly compensate Oracle for Google’s blatant theft even though they’ve so far failed miserably to do so for Apple.

How Tim Cook waged Steve Jobs’ thermonuclear war and dismantled Android – January 31, 2015
Why Google really is evil – January 18, 2014
Oracle’s Larry Ellison continues Steve Jobs’ fight against Google’s Android – December 4, 2013
Steve Jobs: ‘I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product; I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this’ – October 20, 2011
New evidence shows Google may have directly copied Oracle IP in Android – January 21, 2011


      1. Last time I checked both Windows & Blackberry Phones are available as competition (granted though, by a thread). But Blackberry & Microsoft were the one’s ultimately hurt by Google’s thieving and copying activity. I’m sure they’d both be in a much better market position today if it hadn’t been for Google’s cheating & Eric T. Mole.

        1. I have a Windows Phone, a Nokia 1530, to go along with my S6 Edge and Note 4. You think I’m rooting for MS, Google, or Samsung? You would be mistaken if you did. Competing with each other is their problem, not mine.

            1. Please elaborate on exactly what it is that I’mbeing nonsensical about.

              I know your hatred of Samsung has something to do with loyalty to Apple. Unless you’re a stockholder, employee, or supplier, or somehow make money from this, to me, this loyalty is non-sensical.

            2. My “hatred” of Shamdung is based on their lack of business ethics, not loyalty to Apple. I know guys like you hold no scruples or hold your morality fast and loose or need to justify buying from crooks so try to paint a picture or rationalization bias you’re comfortable with. Even if completely wrong by any standard.

  1. Gooble is who Apple should have been going after in the first place. The pics of Android before and after iPhone are quite telling, not so much because of the hardware, but the software and the stolen look & feel of the interface, which only then dictated the general appearance of the hardware.

  2. Oh citizen’s of the free and civilized world, isn’t this hilarious: “Apple won the war by relegating Andoid to undesirable, unprofitable demographics.”

    Either that or I must have missed that article. I do tend to skim by the ones that show off the nuclear mushroom cloud again and again and again. From what I understand though the court cases of course missed Google entirely but hit Samsung , another fine demonstration of courtesy of that “aim for Bin Laden hit Saddam Hussein” guidance system. The court case, well didn’t do too much I don’t think Apple seen a cent so far.

    Looks like Oracle’s aim is a lot better and a lot more appropriate, going after the source, and not some hardware hydra head of the Android beast.

    I really have to read this again: “Apple won the war by relegating Android to undesirable, unprofitable demographics.” I even have to check a definition of relegate: “to assign to a place of insignificance or of oblivion”.

    I think I really need proof of Apple doing this. Some court document saying that (thank to Apple people) making over a certain amount or of a certain education are not allowed to buy products using the Android system would do it. Some written agreement between Apple and Google would do it. Without it though it sounds once again citizens of the free and civilized world like someone trying to take credit for something they are not supposed to. I guess I could always contact Apple’s relegation department.

    Of course their is always the possibility that hardware manufacturers using Android made crappy products and that people or many nations made their own minds and put their money where their mouth is and that’s how they were relegated to insignificance. One should never fail to consider the power of the people. I wonder how that would read.

    “The people of the planet relegated Android to undesirable unprofitable demographics.” Of course that’s just an opinion. I have no proof.

    1. “I think I really need proof of Apple doing this.”

      the proof of Apple relegating Android Andoid to undesirable, unprofitable demographics is Apple making iPhones which take 90% of the world’s cell phone profits, phones which are sold to the higher income segment of consumers (those who spend more on apps and who are worth more to advertisers) while Android phones are sold to generally lower income people ( as polls show) who are worth much less to developers and advertisers (i.e “undesirable, unprofitable demographics ” ). Google makes TWICE as much money from services like Search and Maps off iOS than Android again showing that Android is “undesirable, unprofitable demographics “.

  3. You do realize that if a private entity is allowed to copyright their APIs (which is what this case is about) then it will lead to the end of all interoperability efforts right? That means any company can prevent any other company from being compatible with their products just by copyrighting the API.

    1. I do not think that Oracle intended to (or would ever) block the use of its Java code in Android – indeed they wanted to and would license it to Google. However, while it was never ‘free’ (licenses to Microsoft for one), Android would become ‘less free’ for Google.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.