Google Legal Briefs: Rosetta Stone, Jurin, Oracle, VoIP

Here’s a quick recap of recent developments in four of Google’s legal battles.

Google vs. Rosetta Stone

In the trademark case of Google vs. Rosetta Stone, Google is trying to keep at least 800 pages of documents sealed to avoid PR damage. Thirteen of 15 volumes of documents submitted to the appeals court remain sealed, paidContent reported.

Rosetta Stone sued Google because results that Google returns in search results are for competitors or sites offering fake Rosetta software.

Google vs. Jurin

In the case of Google vs. Daniel Jurin, Google’s motion to dismiss a false association claim has been denied, Search Engine Land reported. Jurin’s claims that Google’s AdWords ads infringe on his building material trademark for “Styrotrim.”

A federal judge in California has ruled that it’s possible searchers could be confused about whether a company produces Styrotrim or is associated with it. Several other pieces of Jurin’s complaints were previously dismissed.

Google vs. Oracle

In the intellectual property case of Google vs. Oracle, Google this week asked the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office to re-examine the validity of Oracle-held patents the company claims Google’s Android OS violated, PC World reported.

A review, if granted, can take years. So Google potentially could delay the trial by asking the judge to issue a stay until after the re-examination is completed.

Google vs. VoIP

VoIP Inc., which provided Google with its “click to call” technology, has sued Google for trade secret theft, unfair competition, unjust enrichment, and breach of contract, Reuters reported.

At issue is a 2005 contract Google broke in 2007 with VoIP’s subsidiary, VoiceOne Communications Corp. Google claims it broke the contract because VoiceOne violated a non-disclosure agreement, but VoIP claims Google used the contract as a pretext to steal confidential information from VoiceOne, such as source codes, algorithms, and info about monetizing Internet phone calls.