Oracle is once again attempting to prove that Google illegally copied unlicensed software code in its Android mobile operating system, but this time the Java developer is invoking the spirit of Harry Potter to push its claim through the courts.
That's despite a judgment last year that Google was not guilty of infringing copyright on Java's application programming interface (API).
Oracle, Google to appeal API case Oracle admits paying bloggers to influence public opinion Oracle and Google locked in $1bn copyright battle
But Oracle has filed a document to a US Federal Court of Appeal comparing Google's actions to that of a Harry Potter plagiarist that it has oh-so-amusingly named Ann Droid, stealing chapters of an upcoming book then publishing it as their own work.
"Ann Droid wants to publish a bestseller. So she sits down with an advance copy of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix - the fifth book - and proceeds to transcribe. She verbatim copies all the chapter titles - from Chapter 1 ('Dudley Demented') to Chapter 38 ('The Second War Begins'). She copies verbatim the topic sentences of each paragraph, starting from the first (highly descriptive) one and continuing, in order, to the last, simple one ('Harry nodded.'). She then paraphrases the rest of each paragraph. She rushes the competing version to press before the original under the title: Ann Droid's Harry Potter 5.0. The knockoff flies off the shelves.
"JK Rowling sues for copyright infringement. Ann's defences: 'But I wrote most of the words from scratch. Besides, this was fair use, because I copied only the portions necessary to tap into the Harry Potter fan base'.
"Obviously, the defences would fail.
"Defendant Google Inc. has copied a blockbuster literary work just as surely, and as improperly, as Ann Droid - and has offered the same defences."
Legal blogger Pamela Jones doesn't think the way Oracle has put the case has done much to recommend it to the courts.
"Yes. Ann Droid. You know what's wrong with this Introduction? Software is not a novel. The copyright rules are not identical. Duh. And that's not an accurate or fair description of what Google did. I'd expect them to say that to a jury, not the Federal Circuit," she posted to Groklaw.
The original case began in April last year when Oracle demanded $1bn (£631m) in compensation from Google, arguing the Android OS developer "helped itself to Oracle's intellectual property without a licence".
The case was eventually settled for $0, obviously not the figure Oracle was looking for, which seems likely to explain why the firm has used what appears to be the legal equivalent of necromancy, bringing the case back from the dead.
Google has until March 28 to respond to Oracle's bizarre attempt at resurrecting the lawsuit. Neither party is willing to comment on the matter at present.
