Oracle Ordered To Lower Damages Claim On Google 204
CWmike writes "Oracle has been ordered to lower its multibillion-dollar claim for damages in its patent infringement lawsuit against Google and its Android operating system, court papers show. Oracle's expert 'overreached' in concluding that Google owed up to $6.1 billion in damages for alleged infringement of Oracle's Java patents, U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup said Friday in a sternly written order. The 'starting point' for Oracle's damages claim should be $100 million, adjusted up and down for various factors, he said. At the same time, Google was wrong to assert that its advertising revenue is not related to the value of Android and should therefore not be a part of Oracle's damages, the judge wrote. He also warned Google, 'there is a substantial possibility that a permanent injunction will be granted' if it is found guilty of infringement."
Re:Like an election, doesn't matter who wins (Score:4, Informative)
In the case of patents, actually, most of the US statutory principles behind patentability have their roots in judicial decisions stretching back almost 200 years in some cases, all of which stem from the Constitutional provision empowering Congress "To promote the Progress of... useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to... Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective... Discoveries."
Subsequent to various court decisions, Congress chose to codify most of those decisions in particular ways to further define certain requirements. There are a few cases where court decisions were countermanded by Congressional action, such as 35 USC 112, sixth paragraph, and the bit in 35 USC 103(a) about "patentability shall not be negatived...," but for the most part, when it comes to patentability, Congress has just gone along with what the courts have said.