Bringing closure to this story concerning the use of Oracle Java APIs by Google’s Android operating system, Google wins in the last court of appeal, SCOTUS:
Google’s copying of the Java SE API, which included only those lines of code that were needed to allow programmers to put their accrued talents to work in a new and transformative program, was a fair use of that material as a matter of law.
This is a reversal of the findings of the Federal Circuit, and also a cause for a lot of relief out there in programmer land, as I suspect a finding for Oracle would have thrown up a legalistic fog that would have put a lot of dollars at risk.
For those not remembering this thread, here’s the SCOTUS summary:
Oracle America, Inc., owns a copyright in Java SE, a computer platform that uses the popular Java computer programming language. In 2005, Google acquired Android and sought to build a new software platform for mobile devices. To allow the millions of programmers familiar with the Java programming language to work with its new Android platform, Google copied roughly 11,500 lines of code from the Java SE program. The copied lines are part of a tool called an Application Programming Interface (API). An API allows programmers to call upon prewritten computing tasks for use in their own programs. Over the course of protracted litigation, the lower courts have considered (1) whether Java SE’s owner could copyright the copied lines from the API, and (2) if so, whether Google’s copying constituted a permissible “fair use” of that material freeing Google from copyright liability. In the proceedings below, the Federal Circuit held that the copied lines are copyrightable. After a jury then found for Google on fair use, the Federal Circuit reversed, concluding that Google’s copying was not a fair use as a matter of law. Prior to remand for a trial on damages, the Court agreed to review the Federal Circuit’s determinations as to both copyrightability and fair use.
It’s a bit mushy for a technical professional.
Incidentally, the late Jeff Prothero, aka Cynbe ru Taren, once told a story that, as a young programmer, he was working in a new language (Loglan I believe), writing a parser for it, and ended up in court with the language inventor, squabbling over whether he was legally permitted to write such a thing. The Loglan Wikipedia page does mention some applicable legal troubles, but doesn’t go into detail.
