Google-Oracle: Allegations of Lawyer Leaking Secret Info
July 12, 2016
I was looking for a single document filed on June 30, 2016. I did my looking only to find that the document had been sealed. There you go. Kentucky oaf aced by legal eagles.
I was interested to read “Google vs Oracle Post-Script: The Price for Revealing Sensitive Financial Information.” The write up alerted me that allegedly one legal eagle let some info leak into the public information stream. I was astounded. I was thwarted only to learn that legal eagles can release information to anyone.
The focus of the write up is a attorney for Oracle, who allegedly made secret information available during the legal dust up9 between Google and Oracle. I must confess that I am not able to figure out who did what to whom in this Java API matter, but the leaking of info caught my attention.
According to the write up:
You may recall a couple of months ago it became public knowledge that Google paid Apple $1 billion dollars to have Google search on the iPhone. The figure apparently represents a 34% slice of the revenue Google makes from searches originating on iPhones. Or it did, “at one point in time”, according to Oracle’s lawyer Annette Hurst. Hurst also revealed that Android had made $31 billion in revenue and $22 billion in profit for Google. At the time Google objected that the figures were not public knowledge.
Okay. The article then reported:
Bloomberg published two stories on the transcript’s contents back in January. Two hours after the story went live the transcript disappeared from electronic court records. Google had apparently petitioned the judge overseeing the case to have the transcript removed from public access as soon as it was published, but Bloomberg’s story let the cat out of the bag.
Now that’s more like it. Just like the document I sought, the info disappeared. Magic.
So what? Google, according to the write up, has the green light to seek “sanctions.” I am familiar with sanction with extreme prejudice, but I am not sure if this is the legal eagle definition of the phrase.
I have several thoughts:
- I think that the Alphabet Google thing probably will have a desire to tackle Oracle and its law firm. Moon shots, solving death, and using legal tactics to keep Oracle on its toes seem to be possible. Well, maybe not solving death, but, hey, Alphabet Google is a sharp outfit.
- HP must be looking at this legal matter and thinking, “Will our pursuit of Autonomy have a similarly happy ending?”
- Oracle may be thinking about its relationship with the firm allegedly involved in the info spill. The write up identifies the lawyer as Annette Hurst. Ars Technica attaches her entity to an outfit called Orrick, Sutcliffe & Herrington.
Interesting. Perhaps the moral of the story is that information should be tightly controlled. Secrecy may be a valid business model. I can’t read a document filed on June 30, 2016, and information disclosed in a trial is like a problem.
Is the answer a Star Chamber type approach? Perhaps there are secret courts. No wonder I could not locate my document which was sealed more quickly than my dear, late mother put a slice of cheese in a plastic baggie.
Stephen E Arnold, July 12, 2016
Comments
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
