Google Briefly Punishes Oracle by Removal from Google Search
|Written by Gene Quinn
President & Founder of IPWatchdog, Inc.
Patent Attorney, Reg. No. 44,294
Zies, Widerman & Malek
Blog | Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn
Posted: August 13, 2010 @ 9:03 pm
Meet Gene in Chicago
Join Gene Quinn for a Happy Hour mixer on Tues, Oct. 14, 2014, 5pm to 7pm at The Deck
CLICK HERE to RSVP.
Meet Gene in NJ
Join Gene Quinn for a Happy Hour mixer on Tuesday, Oct. 21, 2014, 5pm to 7pm at The Hyatt Morristown
CLICK HERE to RSVP. Sponsored by Innography.
Upon further investigation it seems to me that what so many have said in the comments is, in fact, correct. I have finally reached the person referenced who lead me to the story and based on what has been told to me now it seems relatively clear to me that Google did not at any time remove Oracle from its search database. As many have pointed out the top screenshot (see below) does suggest that the person who lead me to this and took the screenshot visited a link explaining this was a hoax.
As regular readers of IPWatchdog.com know, I am a patent attorney and new to this whole “journalism” endeavor. It would seem that I placed unwarranted trust in a single source. That won’t happen again.
As far as whether this person intentionally duped me, who knows, but I do acknowledge what it seems given that a link that explains this was a hoax was visited, as evidenced by the screenshot.
I am not one to push things under a carpet, and for that reason the article below will remain, as well as the comments, to preserve this episode, apology and comments that were correct, as well as mine in defense of a hoax and erroneous single source.
Late yesterday Oracle announced in an exceptionally brief and direct press release that it had filed a lawsuit against Google. The statement issued by Oracle spokesperson Karen Tillman simply said: “In developing Android, Google knowingly, directly and repeatedly infringed Oracle’s Java-related intellectual property. This lawsuit seeks appropriate remedies for their infringement.” But someone at Google didn’t find this amusing and seemingly tampered with Google’s search algorithm and database by eliminating Oracle altogether. This was brought to my attention earlier today and then confirmed at approximately 3:00pm Eastern Time. See what the search revealed below:
By approximately 6:00 pm Eastern Time things seemed back to normal with Google search, someone apparently getting wind that some intentionally harmful and malicious behavior was engaged in by someone somewhere. See image below, which was captured at approximately 8:00 pm Eastern Time:
It seems to me that removing Oracle from the Google search database would be an intentional tort and actionable under a variety of unfair business practice theories. Whether Google wants to admit it or not their search engine has become something of a public facility. As a result, arbitrarily and capriciously denying any individual or company access smacks of censorship and a high handedness that would result in the unilateral selection of winners and losers. With the power of Google they cannot be allowed to do something like this because if they can do it to Oracle they could do it to me or you or many others who would have little recourse. I suspect this is why such swift action was taken to remedy the Oracle deletion. This type of thing shouldn’t happen in the first place, but rather than condemn Google for what is likely the action of one or a few, I will compliment them for rectifying this situation quickly.
In any event, with respect to the federal complaint filed by Oracle, here are some of the highlights:
Paragraph 9 says:
9. One of the most important technologies Oracle acquired with Sun was the Java platform. The Java platform, which includes code and other documentation and materials, was developed by Sun and first released in 1995. The Java platform is a bundle of related programs, specifications, reference implementations, and developer tools and resources that allow a user to deploy applications written in the Java programming language on servers, desktops, mobile devices, and other devices. The Java platform is especially useful in that it insulates applications from dependencies on particular processors or operating systems. To date, the Java platform has attracted more than 6.5 million software developers. It is used in every major industry segment and has a ubiquitous presence in a wide range of computers, networks, and devices, including cellular telephones and other mobile devices. Sun’s development of the Java platform resulted in many computing innovations and the issuance to Sun of a substantial number of important
Paragraph 12 says:
12. Google’s Android competes with Oracle America’s Java as an operating system software platform for cellular telephones and other mobile devices. The Android operating system software “stack” consists of Java applications running on a Java-based object-oriented application framework, and core libraries running on a “Dalvik” virtual machine (VM) that features just-in-time (JIT) compilation. Google actively distributes Android (including without limitation the Dalvik VM and the Android software development kit) and promotes its use by manufacturers of products and applications.
There are 7 counts of patent infringement and one count of copyright infringement. Those patents that are claimed to be infringed are: development kit) and devices that operate Android infringe one or more claims of each of United States Patents Nos. 6,125,447; 6,192,476; 5,966,702; 7,426,720; RE38,104; 6,910,205; and 6,061,520.
Much more will be forthcoming by way of analysis in the weeks to come.- - - - - - - - - -
For information on this and related topics please see these archives:
Posted in: Copyright, Gene Quinn, Google, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patent Litigation, Patents
About the Author
Gene Quinn is a Patent Attorney and the founder of the popular blog IPWatchdog.com, which has for three of the last four years (i.e., 2010, 2012 and 2103) been recognized as the top intellectual property blog by the American Bar Association. He is also a principal lecturer in the PLI Patent Bar Review Course. As an electrical engineer with a computer engineering focus his specialty is electronic and computer devices, Internet applications, software and business methods.