Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

FIND A LEGAL COUNSEL

Google Vs. Oracle To Be Decided By Supreme Court

Almost a decade after Oracle first filed a lawsuit against Google, the Supreme Court is set to give a ruling soon. The long-standing lawsuit surrounds the copyright offenses lobbied against Google for using some code lines from the Java platform. Google had built the Android operating system using Java, owned by Sun Microsystems, but it did not license the platform.

Android Google OraclePhoto Credit: www.shutterstock.com

After Oracle purchased Sun Microsystems in 2010, it accused Google of violating patents and copyrights under Java. The search engine giant claimed that the lines used were only a small amount of Android and that they were essential for developers to be able to write code for Java. Now, over two dozen outside groups have filed supporting briefs in the case, mostly in support of Google.

Two of Google’s supporters, Auto Care Association and Static Control Components, Inc., states in its filing, “Granting copyright protection to APIs threatens otherwise lawful competition for repair, replacement, and customization of software-enabled products. Over the last 20 years, independent businesses that offer products and services that rely on interoperability have faced bet-the-company lawsuits alleging copyright infringement and, increasingly, circumvention under the DMCA. Fair use may protect these competitors against copyright infringement claims, but courts have held fair use does not exempt violations of the DMCA.” The DMCA is the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998. Amici is arguing for the lawsuit to be dismissed.

Other companies advocating for Google include IBM, the Internet Association and Microsoft. In its filing, Microsoft says, “II. It is no surprise that a broad swath of the software industry—from individual developers and computer scientists to start-ups to large companies—have filed amicus briefs supporting petitioner in this case. The modern software industry’s development paradigm, which accepts and expects that much functional code can be reused by follow-on developers, depends upon a flexible application of copyright law. For decades, courts have adapted the fair use doctrine to address the unique issues software presents. Fair use promotes two fundamental but competing interests of copyright law: assuring authors the right to their original expression, and encouraging innovation built upon the ideas and information conveyed by a prior work. In the software context, courts have recognized that copyright should provide protections for aspects of software that reflect truly creative expression from piracy and other forms of identical copying. But courts have balanced that with the recognition that copyright must allow some reuse of software’s functional aspects to enable the collaborative development and interoperability that are critical to the modern computer industry. Copyright holders and follow-on developers alike have flourished under that approach.”

A court had initially agreed with Google in 2012, but Oracle appealed. After a Federal Circuit court agreed that Oracle should get a new trial, it ended in favor of Google again, also appealed by Oracle. The ensuing one overturned the ruling again, which has left the case in legal limbo. The Supreme Court will be deciding the years-long case in the coming months.

Reference: The Verge

For more stories, visit www.hauteliving.com/hautelawyer.

FIND A LEGAL COUNSEL