After false alarm, no verdict Friday in Oracle Google

The jurors will be given until Monday to try to agree on one final copyright issue

The jury failed to reach a verdict Friday on the copyright issues in Oracle's Java infringement lawsuit against Google and will be given until Monday to try to make a decision.

The jury foreman told the court that the jurors were unanimous on all but one of the copyright questions they have been asked to consider. The verdict form has four questions, each in multiple parts.

Judge William Alsup had told the jury on Thursday he would accept a partial verdict if it was the best they could do, and there was tension in the court Friday when it looked like he was going to ask them to read out the parts they had decided.

But because only one question remained, Alsup decided to send the jury home for the weekend to see if they can come to an agreement on Monday. The jury didn't tell the court which issue they have failed to decide on.

"OK, I'll let you go home and speculate," Alsup told the two legal teams after the jury had been dismissed, getting a chuckle from the courtroom.

The jury has been deliberating the case all week, occasionally sending notes to the judge asking for clarification on certain questions. On Thursday a juror asked the judge what happens if they can't reach an agreement, and he gave the panel a pep talk and told them to keep trying.

The verdict form asks four questions, each broken into multiple parts. The first, considered the most important, is whether Google's use of 37 Java APIs in Android infringed Oracle's Java copyrights. A second part to that question asks, if Google did infringe, was its infringement covered by "fair use," which permits copying under limited circumstances.

Another question asks whether public statements by Sun Microsystems, which developed Java, could have led Google to believe it didn't need a license for the technology. A second part asks if Google acted on that advice.

"After an extensive and thorough review of all the evidence and input from fellow jurors, we have reached a verdict unanimously for all questions on the special verdict form except one," the jury foreman told the court.

The lawyers in the case have been debating what to do if the jury agrees on only some of the questions. Alsup has said that issues that don't get resolved could be put to another jury later, and the jury in this case can move on to the patent and damages phases.

James Niccolai covers data centers and general technology news for IDG News Service. Follow James on Twitter at @jniccolai. James's e-mail address is james_niccolai@idg.com

Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

James Niccolai

IDG News Service

Comments

Comments are now closed.

Most Popular Reviews

Follow Us

Best Deals on GoodGearGuide

Shopping.com

Latest News Articles

Resources

GGG Evaluation Team

Kathy Cassidy

STYLISTIC Q702

First impression on unpacking the Q702 test unit was the solid feel and clean, minimalist styling.

Anthony Grifoni

STYLISTIC Q572

For work use, Microsoft Word and Excel programs pre-installed on the device are adequate for preparing short documents.

Steph Mundell

LIFEBOOK UH574

The Fujitsu LifeBook UH574 allowed for great mobility without being obnoxiously heavy or clunky. Its twelve hours of battery life did not disappoint.

Andrew Mitsi

STYLISTIC Q702

The screen was particularly good. It is bright and visible from most angles, however heat is an issue, particularly around the Windows button on the front, and on the back where the battery housing is located.

Simon Harriott

STYLISTIC Q702

My first impression after unboxing the Q702 is that it is a nice looking unit. Styling is somewhat minimalist but very effective. The tablet part, once detached, has a nice weight, and no buttons or switches are located in awkward or intrusive positions.

Latest Jobs

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?