![]() If Google completely loses, it's not clear what kind of damages it will owe Oracle. This opinion doesn't mean the Supreme Court won't take the case, but it's not a good sign for Google. Getty / Justin Sullivan and Flickr / Morgan Verrilli's involvement in this case was reportedly a political landmine inside the Justice Department, as the Obama administration was torn between which of the two hugely influential tech companies to support. He suggested that if the Supreme Court wanted to take on the case, it should do so after the lower courts ruled on Google's argument of fair use. Verrilli suggested the Supreme Court skip taking on the case, at least at this time.īut he didn't completely side with Oracle. In a brief filed Tuesday, US Solicitor General Donald Verrilli sided against Google, disagreeing with Google's claim that API's were not entitled to copyright protection. That doctrine allows limited portions of copyrighted material to be used by others.īut before that could be ruled on, Google asked the Supreme Court to take on the case. ![]() The next step was for the lower courts to hear Google's next defense: that its use of the Java APIs falls under the "fair use" doctrine. ![]() In the end of that first trial, the judge ruled that APIs were not subject to copyright laws.īut Oracle appealed and won, with an appellate court overturning the earlier verdict and saying APIs a re subject to copyright. Oracle sued Google, contending that the APIs were copyrighted and initially asking for $6 billion in damages, but the courts didn't allow that huge amount to stick. Google used Java's APIs to make it easier for millions of Java developers to bring their apps to Android, as they were already trained on Java's APIs. ![]() Account icon An icon in the shape of a person's head and shoulders. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |