Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc.

Filing 1768

REQUEST RE CUSTOM DETAILS Replies due by 5/3/2016. Responses due by 5/2/2016.. Signed by Judge Alsup on 5/1/16. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/1/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
ORACLE AMERICA, INC.,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13

No. C 10-03561 WHA

Plaintiff,
v.
GOOGLE INC.,

14

REQUEST RE
“CUSTOM” DETAILS

Defendant.
/

15
16

With respect to “custom,” the Court understood open-source to still have licensing

17

restrictions, which included, if you downloaded the open-source code, (i) donating back to the

18

open-source public all improvements by the downloader, and (ii) not selling for profit your own

19

version of what you downloaded. Were these conditions part of the open-source custom or not?

20

If so, how does Google contend it complied with these conditions? Oracle will please address

21

these concerns in its “custom” response due MONDAY, and Google must answer specifically on

22

the above (and any other licensing bars raised by Oracle to any such custom) by TUESDAY AT

23

NOON.

24
25
26
27
28

Dated: May 1, 2016.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE