Importantly, the Court held that reimplementing While many hop the Java API was fair use even though Google copi the material intentionally. That fact actually support a finding of fair use. That’s because Google’s purpose was “to allow programmers to work in a different computing environment without discarding a portion of a familiar programming language.” Put another way, Google’s actions were in support of interoperability. And fair use protects it.
In contrast, Oracle sought to profit
from the developers’ familiarity by locking them phone number list into its own environment and forcing Google to pay for a license–what the Court describ as a “tax”–in order to access it. The Court held this kind of “tax”, in derogation of interoperability, did not further the goals of copyright. That was because, it explain, copyright seeks to incentivize the creation of new works. Incentivizing the creation of new works was deem more important than allowing for the monopolization of aspects of the old. That was particularly true here, where Google copi these lines of code not because of their “creativity or beauty but because they would allow programmers to bring their skills to a new smartphone computing environment.” Enforcing copyright in these circumstances “risks causing creativity-relat harms to the public,” frustrating the goals of copyright.
rule directly on the question of software
copyrightability, which may have ketchikan boys top grace to more squarely help small projects take on goliaths, this ruling remains a very good thing. It is a win for interoperability, a win for fair use, and a win for the open principles that form the foundation of so much of the internet today.
“We have to wonder whether a system
that took ten years and tens of million dollars worth of litigation to reach this outcome reflects a copyright system that is as fair as we nit to be,” says Brewster Kahle. “Today, thank goodness the fair use system was reaffirm. This decision will trust review have broad, positive benefits for While many hop openness, innovation and competition.