Oracle have been quietly building out their next generation cloud environments, building up a cloud practice with seasoned professionals that includes Ex-VCE, VMware and AWS personal. They have released a completely new version of their IaaS layer cloud. Dipping into their not insignificant loose pocket change to make several key purchases or acquisitions this year.
Now in what should be their last acquisition of 2016 they have now acquired Dyn for an undisclosed amount; but according to Dan Primack, a former senior editor at Fortune it is expected to be in the region of $600million.
yn are a Manchester, New Hampshire based internet DNS provider founded in 1998, who have unfortunately recently been in the news for all the wrong reasons. They were the target of a massive DDoS attack in October that caused by a botnet using Mirai. Mirai is Malware that targeted Linux based systems and took down numerous high profile sites on the east coast of the USA including Spotify, New York Times, Twitter and eBay. Whether this issue affected the purchase price is to date unknown.
It has recently been Oracle OpenWorld. It was held in San Francisco at the Moscone Center, which surprised me. I had thought it was closed for refurbishment, as this was the reason VMware had given for holding its annual US shindig in Las Vegas this year.
It seems like Oracle must always have a public enemy number one. Those of you with long enough teeth will remember spats it has had over the years with Microsoft and, more recently, Google and HPE. Well, it seems that Oracle has a new public enemy in its laser sights, and that is Amazon Web Services (AWS). The OpenWorld keynotes proclaimed that Oracle is now a real cloud player and the fastest growing cloud company out there. However, according to The Register, even the usually docile and compliant conference attendees were quite vociferous in denying this.
Oracle is acquiring NetSuite in a $9.3B all-cash purchase. After its very shaky start in cloud computing—Ellison famously stated that the computer industry and its approach to cloud computing are highly fashion driven—the purchase of NetSuite makes a statement. Oracle is now front and center where cloud is concerned, though it is true that it is playing catch-up with the likes of AWS, Google, and Azure, and possibly, with regard to this acquisition, Salesforce. However, unlike VMware, Oracle has not yet appeared to have made any serious missteps in its journey. Oracle’s only choices were to build—and build big and quickly—or to buy its entry point, although Oracle has been building out its cloud infrastructures with data centers in all the major regions of the world. It also recognized that it is very hard to play catch-up. So, unlike VMware, it decided that this was not to be its only route to market.
One of the most litigious companies in the valley is Oracle. It is currently in the throes of planning an appeal against a judgement over its Java product.
It is well known that HP and Oracle do not play nice in the corporate playground. Larry Ellison famously stated in 2010 that it would be “virtually impossible” for the two companies to work together in the future. This occurred after HP sued its former CEO Mark Hurd for taking a position as Oracle’s co-president after having resigned, reportedly under pressure from the HP board.
There is another high-profile and long-running legal case going on between HP and Oracle. This particular disagreement concerns alleged breach of contract. The root of this case hinges on Oracle’s decision in March of 2011 to drop Itanium support in all future product development. The crux of it rests on the interpretation of a clause in an agreement signed by the two companies in the wake of Oracle’s hiring of Mark Hurd.
We at the Virtualization Practice have been following the Oracle v. Google case regarding the “fair use” of Java APIs since its inception. For historical perspective, you can read these here, here, and here.
But first, a bit of history. This case started in August 2010, when negotiations between Oracle and Google about licensing Java broke down. The case was assigned to Judge William Alsup, who split it into three distinct phases, these being copyright, patent, and damages. The court stated that there was no infringement of patents, and therefore no damages were awarded to Oracle. With regard to the API copyright infringement, the jury ruled that there was infringement, but it could not reach a decision on Google’s fair use defense. When the court released its decision, Judge Alsup ruled that:
“So long as the specific code used to implement a method is different, anyone is free under the Copyright Act to write his or her own code to carry out exactly the same function or specification of any methods used in the Java API. It does not matter that the declaration or method header lines are identical.” The ruling found that the structure Oracle was claiming was not copyrightable under section 102(b) of the Copyright Act because it was a “system or method of operation.”
In a follow-up to my Oracle v. Google Java spat post—in which I reported that the appeals court has ruled in favour of Oracle, casting doubt on the whole automation industry and the use of Java APIs—it seems that Google has decided to take this to the US Supreme Court. The argument it has submitted to the court is that the appeals court ruling should be overturned in the interest of protecting innovation in high tech.
On the 9th of May, 2014, something happened in the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that could have massive ramifications for our fledgling cloud orchestration industry. Circuit judges with no knowledge about the software industry and how that industry works made a judgement that could pull the rug out from under the whole integration and orchestration industry. “What!” you say?