[OPLIN 4cast] OPLIN 4cast #492: Oracle v. Google

[OPLIN Support]

Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.
<http://www.oplin.org/4cast/>
[image: OPLIN 4Cast]

OPLIN 4cast #492: Oracle v. Google
June 1st, 2016

[image: elephants fighting] This blog tends to shy away from the “big” tech
stories that have been covered in numerous other blogs and news feeds. In
the case of the Oracle v. Google trial, however, there are so many things
going on that touch on important topics to libraries, we cannot let it
pass. Copyright law, the fair use doctrine, and open source software are
all going to be at least a little different once this case finally runs to
its end. Last Thursday’s jury verdict in favor of Google gets us closer to
the end, but we are not there yet. (For a good summary of this huge and
complex legal battle, see the Electronic Freedom Foundation’s [EFF] brief
document <https://www.eff.org/cases/oracle-v-google>.)
- Google prevails as jury rebuffs Oracle in code copyright case
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/27/technology/google-oracle-copyright-code.html>
(New York Times | Nick Wingfield and Quentin Hardy) “The particular areas
of copyright protection in Java involved the so-called declaring code in
Application Programming Interfaces, or A.P.I.s., which have become the
common way that networked programs on the Internet share data. Declaring
code establishes standards and meanings by which future lines of software,
the actual effects the software seeks to create, will operate. This
distinction compelled the 10 jurors — eight women and two men — to hear
extensive testimony by engineers and economists about the nature of code,
and the copyrightable implications of this type of creativity.”
- EFF applauds jury verdict in favor of fair use in Oracle v. Google
<https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/05/eff-applauds-jury-verdict-favor-fair-use-oracle-v-google>
(EFF Deeplinks blog | Parker Higgins) “The Google verdict is an an
important validation of the idea that developing interoperable software
need not require permission or a license. As Google attorney Robert Van
Nest said in his closing arguments, the law expressly endorses fair
use—it’s a right, not an ‘excuse,’ as Oracle attorneys had claimed. Still,
the fair use victory is bittersweet. Judge William Alsup’s previous opinion
that the API labels in question are not copyrightable was the correct one,
based on a reasonable reading of the copyright law in question. The Federal
Circuit decision to reverse that opinion was not just wrong but dangerous.”
- Big win for fair use: Jury says Google’s use of Java API’s was fair use…
on to the appeal
<https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160526/13584834558/big-win-fair-use-jury-says-googles-use-java-apis-was-fair-use-to-appeal.shtml>
(Techdirt | Mike Masnick) “They couldn’t say no one thought APIs were
covered by copyright, so they had to talk about ‘open’ and ‘free’ in ways
that were slightly misleading. If anything, this may be the most important
fair use case to turn on factor 2, ‘the nature of the copyrighted work.’
That’s a factor that rarely is a very big deal, but without being able to
(re)challenge the copyrightability, the focus was mostly on the nature of
APIs and how the tech industry viewed them as free to be reused.”
- Google beats Oracle—Android makes “fair use” of Java APIs
<http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/05/google-wins-trial-against-oracle-as-jury-finds-android-is-fair-use/>
(Ars Technica | Joe Mullin) “Google’s win somewhat softens the blow to
software developers who previously thought programming language APIs were
free to use. It’s still the case that APIs can be protected by copyright
under the law of at least one appeals court. However, the first
high-profile attempt to control APIs with copyright law has now been
stymied by a ‘fair use’ defense.”

*Articles from Ohio Web Library <http://ohioweblibrary.org>:*

   - Federal Circuit overturns Oracle v. Google and potentially widens
   debate over copyright protections.
   <http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy.oplin.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=97606357>
   (*Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal*, Sep.2014, p.13-17 |
   David W. Hansen, Stuart D. Levi, James F. Brelsford, Jose A. Esteves and
   Anthony J. Dreyer)
   - Copyrightability of Java APIs revisited.
   <http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy.oplin.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=101118897>
   (*Communications of the ACM*, March 2015, p.22-24 | Pamela Samuelson)
   - Why Oracle vs. Google API litigation remains a pivotal case.
   <http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy.oplin.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=109363814>
   (*eWeek*, 6/29/2015 | Chris Preimesberger)

------------------------------
The *OPLIN 4cast* is a weekly compilation of recent headlines, topics, and
trends that could impact public libraries. You can subscribe to it in a
variety of ways, such as:

   - *RSS feed.* You can receive the OPLIN 4cast via RSS feed by
   subscribing to the following URL:
   http://www.oplin.org/4cast/index.php/?feed=rss2.
   - *Live Bookmark.* If you're using the Firefox web browser, you can go
   to the 4cast website (http://www.oplin.org/4cast/) and click on the
   orange "radio wave" icon on the right side of the address bar. In Internet
   Explorer 7, click on the same icon to view or subscribe to the 4cast RSS
   feed.
   - *E-mail.* You can have the OPLIN 4cast delivered via e-mail (a'la
   OPLINlist and OPLINtech) by subscribing to the 4cast mailing list at
   http://mail.oplin.org/mailman/listinfo/OPLIN4cast.

© 2016 Ohio Public Library Information Network
[image: Find us on Slideshare] <http://www.slideshare.net/oplin>  [image:
Find us on Facebook] <http://www.facebook.com/oplin.org>  [image: Find us
on Google+] <https://plus.google.com/107751358238995507967>  [image: Find
us on Twitter] <http://www.twitter.com/oplin>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.oplin.org/pipermail/oplin4cast/attachments/20160601/5d34092e/attachment.html>