The Google vs Oracle battle for likely code plagiarizing may just be over, but the aftermath of that is just beginning to take shape. Mr. Robert Van Nest, the head of the legal team from Google, in the just concluded settlement case demanded that Oracle has to pay Google a sum of $4 million to cover the documentation expenses that the later had to go through during the dispute. This was supported by documentations that were already filed in the court prior to this.
As per the claims made by Google’s archivist, 97 million documents were processed for electronic copying and analysis following requests made to 86 custodians of those documentations. Furthermore, Oracle had made 9 requests for documentations that resulted in individual documentation requests for 204 documents. This churned out a huge 3.3 million documents and 20 million pages over Google’s several production periods delivering these.
The whole dispute had resulted in an admittance of copying only 9 lines of the code by Joshua Bloch, who is the Chief Java Architect of Google, and that too included the same algorithms that he developed about a decade ago, hinting at this time spent at Oracle. He also said that he felt this was necessitated and he thinks this was an example of “good engineering practice”.
For Google the judge seemed to agree to this. Further luck prevailed for Google as although the jury found there were duplicated codes, but they did not find any infringement. For Oracle, however, the case offered no significant gains or advantages.
This Google vs Oracle case confirmed the fact that copying codes representing application programming interface cannot be simply considered plagiarizing. The case also gave a 41 ruling which clearly tried to refute any future attempt to twist the legal processes and find a way to maneuver this ruling.