Recently, a partial verdict came back in the copyright trial phase of the case between Oracle and Google. The jury couldn’t decide whether Google’s use of Oracle’s Java APIs in the creation of the Android operating system was fair use, which is a defense to copyright infringement.
A jury finding of fair use would have let Judge Alsup off the hook from having to decide the most fundamental issue — whether APIs can be protected by copyright law.
If there is no copyright protection, there is no copyright infringement.
And Google won’t need a defense.
Soon Judge Alsup will decide whether an API is copyrightable subject matter and not just a method of operation that can’t be protected.
What is an API?
To understand the copyright issue in the Oracle v. Google case, it’s first important to understand a little bit about an API — an application programming interface. Most simply, an API is a set of instructions that allows software components to talk to each other. API owners generally allow developers to have access to their APIs so developers can build compatible applications that communicate seamlessly.
At issue in the case is Google’s use of Java APIs to allow Java applications to run on Android.
Limits on Copyright Protection
Copyright law does not protect all written expression. For example, a recipe, merely listing ingredients without substantial literary expression is not protected. Indeed, the Copyright statute is explicit. There is no copyright protection for “any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle or discovery” regardless of the form of expression. (17 U.S. C. Section 102(b)) If taken literally, however, these exceptions could forclose protection for software, which Congress specifically allowed.
Although copyright law protects some forms of software, operating instructions may be unprotected “methods of operation.” In the infamous Lotus v. Borland case, the First Circuit Court of Appeals found that Lotus’ menu command hierarchy was not copyrightable subject matter because it was a method of operation that was essential to operating the program. The court reasoned that software commands essential to the operability of the program are like “buttons” on a machine and consequently unprotected methods of operation. Moreover, the court reasoned that anyone can build on a method of operation — not just the original developers.
Arguably, APIs are merely methods of operation, interface access buttons. If that is the case, Google has not violated the law by using the APIs to build its Android operating system.
Stay tuned for the initial ruling, which is likely to be appealed to higher courts.
For more information on copyright law see:
The information provided in this legal blog is not intended as legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not submit questions or comments seeking legal advice or submit confidential information through this blog. By communicating through this blog, you understand and agree that the information will not be treated as confidential and the publisher has no duty to keep it confidential.
{ Comments on this entry are closed }









