In a 6-2 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled in favor of Google in its multi-billion dollar copyright lawsuit with Oracle. The lawsuit involves a dispute over code used for Google’s Android operating system, in which Oracle alleged Google had illegally copied its own code. However, the Supreme Court found that Google’s use of Oracle’s code fit under the “fair use” exception of copyright law, protecting it from any copyright claims.
Explaining the Lawsuit
Google is the creator of the Android operating system (OS), which is a kind of software used to run electronic devices like smartphones. When it was creating an Application Programming Interface (API) for developers to create programs for the Android OS, Google copied approximately 11,500 lines of code from Oracle’s Java SE interface. In doing so, Oracle alleges that Google breached their copyright, stealing their code for use in the Android API.
Oracle vs. Google
Oracle’s position was that the code used in Java SE was copyrighted material, which thus could not be used without their express permission. Google, on the other hand, contended that the code that was used was not copyrighted material, and thus could be used freely by them without requiring permission or a license. Google also argued that, even if it was copyrighted material, their use of the code constituted the creation of a transformative work, which would make it fall under the “fair use” exception to copyright law.
The Ruling
In its ruling, which was delivered by Justice Breyer, the Court sided with Google’s claim that the code fell under the “fair use” exception to copyright law. While they agreed with Oracle that the code was copyrighted material, Google used the code as a portion of its larger API. As such, they transformed the code in such a way that it was no longer simply stealing it from Oracle, constituting a “fair use” of Oracle’s copyrighted material. Thus, Google’s actions were not a breach of copyright law, and Oracle’s lawsuit against them was dismissed.
The Implications of the Ruling
This ruling could have a major implication in terms of how the tech sector does business. Programmers often copy and paste snippets of code from each other’s work to save time on their projects, and a ruling in Oracle’s favor would mean all of that work would need to be redone from scratch to avoid copyright issues. However, as the dissent by Justice Thomas notes, a company’s code is its product, and there is a fine line between borrowing code to make your own work, versus outright stealing it and reselling it as your own work. Companies that engage in programming as part of their business should be wary not to go too far, or else risk substantial legal problems.
The business law attorneys at Blodnick, Fazio & Clark are skilled and knowledgeable in the areas of business law and commercial transactions. With offices conveniently located in Garden City, Nassau County, and Babylon, Suffolk County, the firm provides high-quality legal care at reasonable prices. If you require legal assistance concerning business startups, formation, corporate acquisitions and mergers, corporate restructuring, or another business matter, call (516) 280-7105 or fill out our contact form for a free consultation.
