Posted: May 13th, 2022

Google LLC v. Oracle is a legal case within the U.S.

Legal Brief

Introduction and party’s theory
Google LLC v. Oracle is a legal case within the U.S. that pertains to copyright law and computer code. The disagreement is centered on the utilization of parts of the Java application programming interfaces (APIs) of Java’s programming language, which Oracle owns, within early editions of Google’s Android OS. Google confessed to utilizing the APIs; however, it argued that their initial utilization of the APIs met the fair use criteria. Oracle instigated the lawsuit citing that the APIs had a right to a copyright, and as such, sought 8.8 billion US dollars in damages.
Procedural history
Oracle first brought the lawsuit against Google on 13th August, 2010 to the district court for patent and copyright infringement. According to the plaintiff, Google knew that they had created Android without obtaining a license for Java and duplicated its APIs, and for this reason, Google had violated Oracle’s copyright. On 23rd May, 2012, the district court ruled that the Java APIs were not copyrightable. Shortly after the conclusion of the district court ruling, Oracle filed an appeal while Google initiated a cross-claim on the factual copying allegation. Since the lawsuit entailed allegations that pertained to patents, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was assigned the case. The hearing was held on 4th Dec, 2013. On 9th May, 2014, the Federal Circuit reversed the lower court’s decision stating that Java APIs are copyrightable (Thronson, Roth & Grossman, 2016). The lawsuit was also taken back to the district court for a 2nd hearing to establish if the defendant’s utilization was acceptable, according to the fair use principle because the initial suit had not addressed this matter adequately for the appeal court to rule on. As such, the hearing began on 9th May, 2016. On 26th May, 2016, the court ruled that Android did not violate the copyrights owned by Oracle since its re-execution of Java APIs was safeguarded by fair use. Oracle formally appealed this on 26th October, 2016. The Federal Circuit heard this appeal in 2017, and on March 27th 2018, the Court ruled in Oracle’s favor, citing Google’s use of Java was unfair. On 24th January, 2019, Google petitioned the US Supreme Court for writ of certiorari to challenge the 2 rulings that the Federal Circuit made in favor of Oracle. Certiorari was granted by the Supreme Court on 15th November, 2019, and anticipated to hear the case on 24th March, 2020. On March, the Supreme Court postponed the March sitting amid COVID-19 concerns.
Facts
Google created its OS utilizing portions of Java program code, which Oracle owns. To aid developers to write their own programs for the OS, the edition of Google utilized similar words, purpose, and arrangement as Java’s APIs. In this regard, Oracle brought a lawsuit against Google for contravention of copyright and patent. However, the district court ruled that the APIs are not subjected to copyright since allowing a private enterprise to own the copyright to a programming language would serve to suppress creativity and teamwork, contrary to the copyright goals. The decision of the lower court was reversed by the Federal Circuit. This court found that the Java APIs are copyrightable; nonetheless, it did not determine the likelihood of a fair use defense (Thronson, Roth & Grossman, 2016). When the case was taken back to the district court, Google’s utilization of the Java API was ruled to be fair use by a jury. Oracle appealed this decision, and again, the Federal Circuit overturned the district court’s decision. It was determined that Google’s utilization was not fair according to the law. Google’s petition for certiorari was accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Arguments
Does the protection of copyright extend to a software interface?
The answer is yes. From the law’s perspective, a software program is an intricate work that encompasses both artistic and functional components. Therefore, a software interface may be protected by various kinds of intellectual property law, which includes patent law, copyright, trademark etc. Notably, copyright law focuses on protecting a certain expression of an idea, not the functional components of a particular work. Therefore, to qualify for protection by copyright, the idea must be original. In this case, the way that Oracle’s APIs were packaged was original and innovative, thus making them copyrightable.
Does Google’s utilization of a software interface in the context of developing a new computer program amount to fair use?
The answer is no. This is because Google’s utilization of the APIs failed to meet the 4 criteria for fair use. As such, it was not transformative because it was utilized for similar purposes; it was not negligible; it was not intended to allow 3rd party interoperability; and it was plausible since the use brought harm to Oracle.
Conclusion
The Java APIs are copyrightable, and this is evidenced by the fact that the ideas behind them are innovative and original, facts that even Google had conceded. Google’s utilization of the APIs was not fair. It clearly failed to meet the four criteria of fair use. Therefore, when the Supreme Court gets to hear the case, it should rule in Oracle’s favor and affirm the Federal Circuit’s rulings.

Reference
Thronson, M. J., Roth, G. S., & Grossman, J. D. (2016). Intellectual property legal opinions. Aspen Publishers.

Order | Check Discount

Tags: Google LLC v. Oracle is a legal case within the U.S.