Google Wins Oracle Copyright Fight as Top Court Overturns Ruling
'The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Alphabet's Google didn't commit copyright infringement when it used Oracle's programming code in the Android operating system, sparing Google from what could have been a multibillion-dollar award. From a report: The 6-2 ruling, which overturns a victory for Oracle, marks a climax to a decade-old case that divided Silicon Valley and promised to reshape the rules for the software industry. Oracle was seeking as much as $9 billion. The court said Google engaged in legitimate "fair use" when it put key aspects of Oracle's Java programming language in the Android operating system. Writing for the court, Justice Stephen Breyer said Google used "only what was needed to allow users to put their accrued talents to work in a new and transformative program." Each side contended the other's position would undercut innovation. Oracle said that without strong copyright protection, companies would have less incentive to invest the large sums needed to create groundbreaking products. Google said Oracle's approach would discourage the development of new software that builds on legacy products.' -- source: https://news.slashdot.org/story/21/04/05/1448243 Cheers, Peter -- Peter Reutemann Dept. of Computer Science University of Waikato, NZ +64 (7) 577-5304 http://www.cms.waikato.ac.nz/~fracpete/ http://www.data-mining.co.nz/
Once could not have wished for a better outcome, with such far-reaching positive consequences. This certifies the safety for developers to implement compatible APIs, to integrate, to extend, to compete in the market. I can imagine this ruling being used as a precedent for countless other cases, many just barely related. Quite a day to celebrate. Nowhere else for Oracle to go, except to retire to the boardroom to contemplate a new reality. David On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 at 08:55, Peter Reutemann <fracpete(a)waikato.ac.nz> wrote:
'The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Alphabet's Google didn't commit copyright infringement when it used Oracle's programming code in the Android operating system, sparing Google from what could have been a multibillion-dollar award. From a report:
The 6-2 ruling, which overturns a victory for Oracle, marks a climax to a decade-old case that divided Silicon Valley and promised to reshape the rules for the software industry. Oracle was seeking as much as $9 billion. The court said Google engaged in legitimate "fair use" when it put key aspects of Oracle's Java programming language in the Android operating system. Writing for the court, Justice Stephen Breyer said Google used "only what was needed to allow users to put their accrued talents to work in a new and transformative program." Each side contended the other's position would undercut innovation. Oracle said that without strong copyright protection, companies would have less incentive to invest the large sums needed to create groundbreaking products. Google said Oracle's approach would discourage the development of new software that builds on legacy products.'
-- source: https://news.slashdot.org/story/21/04/05/1448243
Cheers, Peter -- Peter Reutemann Dept. of Computer Science University of Waikato, NZ +64 (7) 577-5304 http://www.cms.waikato.ac.nz/~fracpete/ http://www.data-mining.co.nz/ _______________________________________________ wlug mailing list -- wlug(a)list.waikato.ac.nz | To unsubscribe send an email to wlug-leave(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Unsubscribe: https://list.waikato.ac.nz/postorius/lists/wlug.list.waikato.ac.nz
On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 08:55:09 +1200, Peter Reutemann quoted:
'The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Alphabet's Google didn't commit copyright infringement when it used Oracle's programming code in the Android operating system, sparing Google from what could have been a multibillion-dollar award.'
According to this <https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/04/supreme-court-sides-with-google-in-api-copyright-battle-with-oracle/> preliminary report, the court did not actually rule on whether APIs were copyrightable at all, only that fair use was applicable if they were. The idea that APIs were copyrightable came from the Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit, which twice overturned lower-court verdicts that were in favour of Google. It’s worth noting that the only reason appeals went to the notoriously intellectual-property-friendly CAFC is because the original lawsuit from Oracle included a patent claim, which was actually quickly thrown out.
On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 10:18:11AM +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 08:55:09 +1200, Peter Reutemann quoted:
'The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Alphabet's Google didn't commit copyright infringement when it used Oracle's programming code in the Android operating system, sparing Google from what could have been a multibillion-dollar award.'
According to this <https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/04/supreme-court-sides-with-google-in-api-copyright-battle-with-oracle/> preliminary report, the court did not actually rule on whether APIs were copyrightable at all, only that fair use was applicable if they were.
Yes, Mike Masnick of Techdirt also notes that, unfortunately, the court did not rule on whether the APIs are copyrightable. It's just that if they are copyrightable Google's use meet the requirements of fair use. Michael.
A more in-depth report here <https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/04/how-the-supreme-court-saved-the-software-industry-from-api-copyrights/>. The judges’ understanding of what an “API” was, was as a software skill belonging to the programmers, not the platform vendor: “Programmers have learned how to use Java's APIs and that investment is not something that Sun created.” Oracle’s claim that Android destroyed the market for Java phones was given short shrift.
participants (4)
-
David McNab -
Lawrence D'Oliveiro -
Michael Cree -
Peter Reutemann