Follow

The Federal Circuit has reversed ND Cal on Oracle v. Google, finding that Android's use of Java APIs was not a fair use. If anybody has any questions about the opinion or the case I'm happy to answer them.

I'm not a lawyer but I do read a lot of law and I've followed this case very closely (including attending the trial that just got overturned).

@veryonline OpenJDK is AFAIK mostly not affected, as it's "official". (Other licensed projects will also not be affected)

@veryonline the next step is remand back to the (same) district court, which will now determine damages.

@xor @veryonline Can Google try to appeal to the Supreme Court again?

@russss @veryonline yup, although iirc not on the copyrightability issue (instead, on the fair use one)

@xor @russss @veryonline do you have a link to a good rundown of whats happened so far?

@Satsuma @russss @veryonline the EFF summary goes up until the district court (so does not include today's ruling) and is reasonably good and quick eff.org/cases/oracle-v-google

@xor is this possibly relevant enough to other API after the case was (formerly) settled that the computing world is going to have a terrifying legal Mexican standoff as they figure out who pays who what?

@Ashrand this case is certainly being closely monitored, and earlier rounds of litigation have led to follow-up suits. One prominent example is Cisco v. Arista, which is now in front of the same Court of Appeals eff.org/deeplinks/2018/01/cisc

@xor Oof.

1) Does this mean that anyone implementing an API-compatible replacement for a library needs to license the API from the original library author?

2) Are there any sort of BSD/GPL-like "API licenses" that companies can use to authorize reimplementation of their API without open-sourcing their entire project?

@lm 1) I would say you'll see a lot of developers and companies spooked and looking for licenses where they hadn't needed to before.

2) this is a good question and I don't know the answer. There hasn't really been demand for such a license previously, as this was considered (properly so, imo) to be uncopyrightable material.

@xor Agreed that this shouldn't be a copyright issue in the first place...

I suppose the best way to limit damages here is to campaign for companies to permissively license their APIs?

@xor

Oh, 3) does this mean we get more judge alsup stories

@xor yes, I have a question, where is the teespring for "you wouldn't reimplement an API"

@xor Just confirming my understanding of what you said: So the new ruling is that Google IS beholden in some way to Oracle after all?

@benhamill yes, Google infringed Oracle's Java copyright. It's now being sent back down to Alsup to do a damages trial (or will be appealed to SCOTUS)

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Generalistic and moderated instance. All opinions are welcome, but hate speeches are prohibited. Users who don't respect rules will be silenced or suspended, depending on the violation severity.