Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc.

Filing 1078

MOTION in Limine re Evidence Allegedly Supporting Knowledge Requirement for Indirect Infringement filed by Google Inc.. Responses due by 5/21/2012. Replies due by 5/29/2012. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B)(Van Nest, Robert) (Filed on 5/6/2012)

Download PDF
EXHIBIT B Attorneys' Eyes Only 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 4 5 _______________________ 6 ORACLE AMERICA, INC., 7 Plaintiff, 8 vs. 9 GOOGLE, INC., 10 11 ) ) ) No. CV 10-03561 WHA ) Defendant. ) _______________________) 12 13 ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY 14 15 Videotaped Deposition of ANDREW E. RUBIN, 16 taken at 333 Twin Dolphin Drive, Redwood 17 Shores, California, commencing at 9:31 a.m., 18 Tuesday, April 5, 2011, before Leslie 19 Rockwood, RPR, CSR No. 3462. 20 21 22 23 24 25 PAGES 1 - 149 Page 1 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Attorneys' Eyes Only 1 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL: 2 3 FOR THE PLAINTIFF ORACLE AMERICA, INC.: 4 5 BOIES SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP 6 BY: 7 STEVEN C. HOLTZMAN, ESQ. BEKO REBLITZ-RICHARDSON, ESQ. 8 1999 Harrison Street, Suite 900 9 Oakland, California 94612 10 (510) 874-1000 11 sholtzman@bsfllp.com 12 brichardon@bsfllp.com 13 14 15 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 16 BY: 17 755 Page Mill Road 18 Palo Alto, California 94304-1018 19 (650) 813-5600 20 mdpeters@mofo.com MARC DAVID PETERS, ESQ., PH.D. 21 22 23 24 25 Page 2 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Attorneys' Eyes Only 1 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL (CONTINUED): 2 3 FOR THE DEFENDANT GOOGLE, INC.: 4 5 KING & SPALDING, LLP 6 BY: 7 1180 Peachtree Street, NE 8 Atlanta, Georgia 30309-3521 9 (404) 572-4826 10 BRUCE W. BABER, ESQ. bbaber@kslaw.com 11 12 BY: SCOTT T. WEINGAERTNER, ESQ. 13 1185 Avenue of the Americas 14 New York, New York 10036-4003 15 (212) 556-2227 16 sweingaertner@kslaw.com 17 18 BY: STEVEN T. SNYDER, ESQ. 19 100 North Tryon Street, Suite 3900 20 Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 21 (704) 503-2630 22 ssnyder@kslaw.com 23 24 25 Page 3 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Attorneys' Eyes Only 1 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL (Continued): 2 3 RENNY HWANG, ESQ. 4 GOOGLE ASSOCIATE LITIGATION COUNSEL 5 1600 Ampitheatre Parkway 6 Mountain View, California 94043 7 (650) 253-2551 8 rennyhwang@google.com 9 10 11 ALSO PRESENT: 12 13 ALEXEI DIAS, VIDEOGRAPHER 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 4 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Attorneys' Eyes Only 1 2 MR. SNYDER: Steve Snyder, King & Spalding, for Google. 3 MR. HWANG: Renny Hwang for Google. 4 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Thank you. 5 will be sworn in, and we can proceed. 6 THE REPORTER: The witness 7 09:32:13 Would you raise your right hand, please. 8 You do solemnly state that the evidence you 9 shall give in this matter shall be the truth, the whole 10 truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God. 11 THE WITNESS: 12 THE REPORTER: 13 14 Thank you. EXAMINATION BY MR. HOLTZMAN: 15 16 Yes. Q. Good morning. Could you please state your 09:32:26 full name and spell your last name for the record. 17 A. Sure. 18 Q. Have you ever had your deposition taken 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. How many times? 22 A. Probably about four times. 23 Q. Okay. 19 It's Andrew Edward Rubin, R-U-B-I-N. before? 09:32:37 Let me just very quickly then cover a 24 few basic ground rules. I'll be asking questions today. 25 If at any time you don't understand a question I ask, let 09:32:48 Page 6 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Attorneys' Eyes Only 1 Q. And you over time were personally involved in 2 discussions with Sun on behalf of Google with regard to 3 Android; correct? 4 A. 5 6 Yes, I led the discussions with Sun regarding Android. 09:38:08 Q. And you have been personally involved in 7 discussions with Oracle regarding Android on behalf of 8 Google; correct? 9 A. Yes. Again, I led those discussions as well. 10 Q. Okay. So between -- when was the first time 11 you had a discussion with either Sun or Oracle regarding 12 09:38:18 what became Android? 13 A. Sure. The discussions, I think, were -- 14 probably the earliest discussions were -- can you ask the 15 question again? 16 Q. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Sorry. 09:38:38 When was the first time -- I can rephrase it. When was the first time you had a discussion with Sun regarding what became Android? A. When Android was a start-up company, probably in about 2000 -- either late 2004 or early 2005. Q. Okay. 09:38:49 Actually, let me come back to that because I want to explore that separately. Between 2005, when you started at Google, and 24 now, about how many discussions, in person or by phone, 25 did you participate in with anyone from Sun or Oracle 09:39:09 Page 12 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Attorneys' Eyes Only 1 relating to what became Android? 2 A. Sure. So the early discussions were directly 3 with Sun. The subject matter discussed was about a Sun 4 product. 5 they acquired Sun. 6 think -- I'm vague on the actual dates. So Oracle didn't come into the picture until So the early discussions in -- I 7 Q. Okay. 8 A. But -- but you asked several questions. 09:39:26 9 So the discussions were probably in late 2005, early 2006, 10 is when they started or really kind of heated up. 11 Because, again, I was in discussions when we were a 12 start-up company before the acquisition. 13 09:39:41 But the second part of your question was how 14 many discussions did we have in that time frame, and it 15 was a handful. 16 the 2005 to 2006 time frame. 17 Q. It was probably about five or six from Okay. 09:39:56 And after that, when was the next time 18 that you had discussions with anybody from Sun, if at 19 all? 20 A. Again, vague on the precise dates, but in 21 the -- in around the 2008 time frame, which was around 22 the time Android launched, we entered into another round 23 09:40:06 of discussions after Sun approached us. 24 25 Q. Okay. So I'm sorry, so Android launched in 2008? 09:40:22 Page 13 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Attorneys' Eyes Only 1 security mechanism or the security model; is that 2 correct? 3 4 A. Yes. And those are the two, to my recollection. 5 Q. That's fine. Did you ever think that issues 6 relating to patent infringement contributed to the end of 7 09:56:51 those negotiations in -- this would have been in 2006. 8 A. No, I did not. 9 Q. Did you ever say that you negotiated with Sun 10 and decided to walk away after Sun threatened Google with 11 patent violations? 12 A. Huh-uh, no. Q. Did you ever say that you negotiated with 13 09:57:22 Sorry, can you ask the question again? 14 15 Sun? 16 I'm sorry. Yes. I'm sorry. Strike that and start again. 17 Did you ever say that you negotiated with Sun 18 and decided to walk away after Sun threatened Google with 19 patent violations? 20 A. 09:57:35 21 Did I ever say it? MR. HOLTZMAN: Not to my knowledge, no. Okay. 09:57:47 I'll ask the court 22 reporter to mark as Oracle Deposition Exhibit Number 3 a 23 two-page document Bates Numbered Google 0200020474. 2 24 25 (Exhibit 3 marked.) Q. BY MR. HOLTZMAN: Do you recognize Oracle 09:58:55 Page 26 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Attorneys' Eyes Only 2 1 Exhibit 3? 2 A. I'm refreshing my memory now. 3 Q. So what is it? 4 A. It looks like an email thread between two of 5 my engineers or three of my engineers and myself. 6 7 Okay. Q. 09:59:29 And the three engineers are Bob Lee, Brian Swetland, and Dan Bornstein; is that correct? 8 A. Correct. 9 Q. And what's the date of that email? 10 A. It was originally -- it appears originally 11 August 11th, 2007. 12 Q. 13 09:59:43 And so there are two emails represented in this document; correct? 14 A. It's an email string. 15 Q. String. Fair enough. 16 fine. 17 about the top email here. 18 That's fine. That's 09:59:55 And I'm interested -- I just wanted to ask you correct? That's an email from you; 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. And if you go down to the last paragraph 21 10:00:04 before your name, Andy? 22 A. Uh-huh. 23 Q. Just read that. 24 A. I'm sorry, which paragraph does that start 25 with? 10:00:18 Page 27 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Attorneys' Eyes Only 1 Q. Where it says "tricky no"? 2 A. It says: "Why would we want to do anything 3 to support this behavior? 4 as much as possible from Sun." 5 6 7 Q. that. All right. We want to distance ourselves And then you have a P.S. after 10:00:27 Could you read that. A. "We negotiated nine months with Sun and 8 decided to walk away after they threatened to sue us over 9 patent violations." 10 Q. 11 12 13 14 Okay. Now, the reference to negotiating nine 10:00:38 months with Sun, what does that refer to? A. I imagine that refers to the time frame that we were discussing, between 2005 and 2006. Q. And then when you say you decided to walk 15 away after they threatened to sue us over patent 16 violations, what were you referring to there? 17 A. 10:00:57 Well, during our discussions -- I mean, first 18 of all, this -- let me put this in context. This was a 19 message that I had -- that I had sent in reaction to two 20 strings that my engineers had sent me in this email 21 thread, and what they're -- what they were bringing to my 22 attention was some public statements Sun was making and 23 what the -- what the community, the Java community's 24 reaction was to Sun's TCK licensing announcement. 25 don't recall exactly what the announcement was, but this 10:01:15 And I 10:01:41 Page 28 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Attorneys' Eyes Only 1 thread started out with a public community rumor, I would 2 say. 3 4 5 Q. Okay. So I got that background, let me go back now to the question. A. And my response was, to my engineers, was 10:01:58 6 basically to -- as a manager, to provide some guidance to 7 them on basically getting them to move on and understand 8 that we were no longer -- there was no longer really an 9 opportunity to partner with Sun. 10 In my discussions with Sun, I don't believe 10:02:15 11 Sun ever threatened to sue us over patent violations. 12 think I was choosing those words to help my engineering 13 team move along and, you know, continue their development 14 effort on other technologies. 15 I During this -- the discussions, by the way, I 16 mean, in normal business discussions, I think there's -- 17 I think there's a line where when you're in a partnership 18 discussion you don't say, you know, "do this or we're 19 going to sue you," but I do think you make statements and 20 vague assertations on the consequences or the evolution 21 of the partnership in cases the companies agree to 22 10:02:35 disagree. 23 10:02:55 I did feel during the Sun discussions that 24 there was a threat that Sun would pursue legal action 25 if -- if -- even if the legal action was frivolous, in 10:03:20 Page 29 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Attorneys' Eyes Only 1 order to successfully complete the partnership. 2 3 4 Does that make sense? Q. Let me see if I can drill down on that a little bit. 5 6 I think so. First of all, you referred to even if the action was frivolous. 10:03:35 Is that your characterization? 7 A. Yes, completely my characterization. 8 Q. You're not saying that Sun threatened or 9 10 11 12 13 implied that it might assert frivolous claims, in its words, against Google; correct? A. 10:03:50 You know, again, I'm really not qualified to determine what's frivolous or not. Q. Sure. Okay. So I just want to go back, and 14 I just want to make sure I understand. 15 here that Sun threatened to sue us or sue Google over 16 patent violations, what did you mean? 17 A. When you wrote 10:04:03 It was probably more along the lines of our 18 business discussions had concluded. 19 the two reasons that I stated to you, the security 20 control and the third-party developer ecosystem control. 21 As the -- as the discussions concluded, it was implied, 22 probably is the best way to say, that Sun would or could, 23 I should say, choose a legal solution to bring the 24 partnership back together. 25 Q. They concluded for And what in your understanding was the nature 10:04:17 10:04:49 Page 30 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Attorneys' Eyes Only 1 machine technology, and that virtual machine technology 2 virtually executed machine instructions that were defined 3 by Sun. 4 I was, you know, as an accelerator interested 5 in Sun open sourcing their virtual machine technology as 6 well, but we never reached a conclusion on whether that 7 was possible or not. 8 9 Q. 12:26:17 What was it about the Sun virtual machine that would serve as an accelerator? 10 A. It was implemented. 11 shipping product. 12 Q. It was actually a 12:26:33 Now, going back to the question about patent 13 rights, did you have any discussion with Sun about 14 whether there were any patents relating to the Sun 15 virtual machine? 16 A. 12:26:45 You know, I do recall some discussions around 17 patents. One of the ideas of partnering with Sun was to 18 basically -- you know, if Google set out -- you know, if 19 Android set out as a start-up company, then -- to build 20 an open platform, then became part of Google, and the 21 role that Google was to basically continue to build the 22 open platform, there was a notion of a partnership where 23 we could actually license both technology, 24 implementation, and patents, where the patents would be 25 used to protect the open platform. 12:27:02 12:27:22 Page 111 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Attorneys' Eyes Only 1 So I think there was some discussions, 2 especially in the 2008 meetings, where Sun would -- would 3 basically assign some patents to Google to help protect 4 Android in the open market should somebody come along and 5 try to sue. 6 7 Q. 12:27:43 To what extent did that provide value to Google or would that have provided value to Google? 8 A. Well, if Google's investing its resources in 9 building an open platform, it makes sense to invest some 10 in protecting the open platform once it comes out so we 11 make sure that, you know, that platform survives. 12 Q. Okay. 12:28:01 Now, you understood from your 13 discussions with Sun that Sun offered licenses governing 14 the use of Sun copyrights; correct? 15 A. I viewed the license -- in the conversations 16 with Sun, it was relayed to me that Sun licenses 17 12:28:17 technology and the technology comes for a price. 18 Q. Okay. And you didn't unpack whether that 19 technology what's, involved there is copyrights or 20 patents or trademarks or whatever? 21 A. I just viewed it as a bundle. 12:28:36 And again, I'm 22 not a lawyer so it's hard to dissect that stuff. It's -- 23 you know, it's a middle-ware component of a platform, and 24 in my view, for a price, it could accelerate our whole 25 effort. 12:28:49 Page 112 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Attorneys' Eyes Only 1 Q. Okay. Now, let's move past the 2005, 2006 2 time frame. You'll have to remind me, what was the next 3 period of time where you had discussions with Sun? 4 A. It was immediately prior to the Oracle 5 acquisition of Sun. 6 date. 7 or early 2009 and -- yeah, that was the time frame. I don't remember specifically the 12:33:41 My sense is it was either 2008 -- mid to late 2008 8 Q. Okay. And who initiated those discussions? 9 A. The Sun representatives. 10 Q. Do you remember who from Sun? 11 A. It was Vineet, Eric, who I believe was their 12:34:00 12 then CTO. 13 changes, and one other person, but basically it was the 14 technology owners of Java and Vineet, who as you know, 15 was the salesperson. 16 17 18 The company had kind of gone through some Q. 12:34:24 And who from Google participated in those discussions? A. Myself, primarily, and there was one other 19 person probably related to -- that's interesting. 20 imagining, you know, I know the meeting room we sat in, 21 and I know there were four of us -- five of us. 22 else from Google's side. 23 don't know. 24 25 Q. I'm 12:34:42 Somebody It was either -- I'm sorry, I I don't remember. Okay. And what was the subject of that discussion? 12:34:57 Page 115 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Attorneys' Eyes Only 1 2 3 4 5 Q. Do you recall anybody from Sun putting a number on that value to them? A. Yeah, I'm sure numbers were thrown around in the meeting. Q. I don't remember what it was. Okay. So after those -- that series of 6 meetings, however many it was, when was the next time you 7 had any communication with Sun or Oracle, I guess, about 8 12:38:59 Android or anything relating to it? 9 A. I don't know. I mean, there were probably 10 some intermediate emails after those kind of intense, you 11 know, handful of discussions. 12 you keep the relationship going. 13 across town from each other kind of thing. 14 other around. 15 12:39:13 Ultimately we passed, but You know, we lived You see each You want to be friendly. When the Oracle acquisition got announced, 16 I'm sure there was some email exchanges, congratulations, 17 you know, and then -- and then, a time after the 18 acquisition in 2010, we were approached by Oracle to 19 12:39:27 revive discussions around the partnership. 20 Q. Who at Oracle approached who from Google? 21 A. It was Ellison reaching out, I believe, to 22 Eric and also Larry, and I forget if Ellison reached out 23 12:39:50 first to Eric and then to Larry. 24 25 Q. Okay. straight here. Let me make sure we have the names We have Larry Ellison on the Oracle side, 12:40:08 Page 119 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Attorneys' Eyes Only 1 WWW.google.com when they want to do a search for 2 something. 3 Q. 4 Is that the only metric you have for measuring the number of Android-enabled devices? 5 A. That's one. I think another one is how many 6 people use Gmail, how many people view YouTube videos. 7 So again, these are independent services that are kind of 8 tied together to Google's back end, and Google's back end 9 is the destination. 13:13:30 10 And when a packet lands -- when an IP packet lands on our, you know, back end, we know it. 11 Q. And you know that's coming from an Android 13 A. Generally speaking, yes. 14 Q. Okay. 13:13:47 12 device? Now, you mentioned earlier that 15 after -- I think you said you had two meetings at Google 16 with Mr. Kurian; correct? 17 A. Uh-huh. 18 I'm vague. 19 Q. 20 at Oracle; correct? 21 A. Correct. 22 Q. And who attended that meeting? 23 A. Just myself. 24 Q. From Google, just you? 25 A. 13:13:58 Two or maybe three, but I believe -- Yes. Definitely two. Okay. I'm not sure three. Then you said you had another meeting 13:14:13 Page 138 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Attorneys' Eyes Only 1 Q. And who attended from Oracle? 2 A. A whole bunch of people that I don't recall 3 their names. I think it was pretty much all the product 4 owners and the various business owners at Oracle. 5 Mr. Kurian was there as well, as well as their general 6 counsel. 7 Q. Okay. 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. About how long did that meeting last? 10 A. It was relatively short, 40 minutes, 13:14:32 11 Oracle general counsel? 13:14:42 45 minutes. 12 Q. And what was discussed during that meeting? 13 A. Well, so the -- so the two teams couldn't 14 agree on Oracle's ask, which was, you know, the realm of 15 100 million a year plus, you know, search REV share and 16 things like that. 17 think, a last ditch effort for Oracle to engage with 18 Google in a partnership. 19 13:15:00 And so this meeting was basically, I And Oracle surprised me by having their -- 20 their general counsel there. 21 that they had prepared a lawsuit against us for copyright 22 and patent infringement and that they were willing to 23 issue the lawsuit against us unless we could come to 24 terms on the financial amount. 25 Q. And the statement was made How did you respond? 13:15:27 13:15:45 Page 139 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?