SCOTUS has stepped up and accepted the Google appeal of Oracle’s victory in Federal Circuit Appeals Court concerning whether computer language API signatures are subject to copyrights, as Ars Technica reported a few days ago:
The Supreme Court has agreed to review one of the decade’s most significant software copyright decisions: last year’s ruling by an appeals court that Google infringed Oracle’s copyrights when Google created an independent implementation of the Java programming language.
I wonder if the industry has thought about readying itself for a rebuff from SCOTUS, leaving companies as possibly legally vulnerable. From the previous Ars Technica report on this subject:
If APIs can be restricted by copyright, then every significant computer program could have legal landmines lurking inside of it. Grimmelmann warns that API copyrights could easily give rise to API trolls: companies that acquire the copyright to old software, then sue companies that built their software using what they assumed were open standards. API copyrights could also hamper interoperability between software platforms, as companies are forced to build their software using deliberately incompatible standards to avoid legal headaches.
While I think it’s a misstatement to suggest that every significant computer program might be at risk, because they don’t usually indulge in this practice, those firms who are providing software libraries which replace others will be at risk.
What can be done? Sequestering the copyright interests in entities which refuse to pursue copyright infringement suits might be a first step. Industry giants who feel they are at risk might contribute to these entities, and acquisition of APIs which they may have innocent violated should zero out those risks.
Similarly, acquisition of those entities owning those rights would also safeguard those manufacturers. Those firms which have gone out of business would also confound the persistent copyright troll.
Another approach would be to lobby Congress into passing laws which either obviate the judiciary’s decisions, or limits the damage for those firms which trespassed before they knew the law was against them.
The industry had best get on the ball on this problem, because if they don’t, the damage won’t be limited to Court awards, but also the vitality this part of the industry contributes to the entire software project, warts and all.
