Weekly Edition
Return to the Announcements page
| |||||||||||||
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw)
Groklaw has the news that the judge in Oracle v. Google has ruled that the Java APIs are not copyrightable. "The overall name tree, of course, has creative elements but it is also a precise command structure — a utilitarian and functional set of symbols, each to carry out a pre-assigned function. This command structure is a system or method of operation under Section 102(b) of the Copyright Act and, therefore, cannot be copyrighted. Duplication of the command structure is necessary for interoperability." That pretty much makes the case a total loss for Oracle, but, of course, appeals are possible.
(Log in to post comments)
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw) Posted May 31, 2012 22:27 UTC (Thu) by kragil (subscriber, #34373) [Link]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc#t=33m40s
Oracle sucks. Linus on G+:
Sometimes I really wish I wasn't always right. It's a curse, I tell you."
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw) Posted May 31, 2012 22:36 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
Linus is right. As usual.
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw) Posted Jun 1, 2012 0:57 UTC (Fri) by JoeF (guest, #4486) [Link] The link to Linus' G+ post:https://plus.google.com/u/0/102150693225130002912/posts/TZsT2BP3TDh
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw) Posted May 31, 2012 23:05 UTC (Thu) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link]
Ironically, this may not be the best outcome.
This is only precedent in that jurisdiction, and since the decision went in "our favor", it won't get appealed up to somewhere where it's precedental *everywhere*.
Or so I understand American Jurisprudence; IANAL, I just play one on the Internet.
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw) Posted May 31, 2012 23:09 UTC (Thu) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
If Oracle appeals it, the decision will become precedental in the larger scope.
That said, I very much doubt that Oracle will appeal this up the two levels needed to get to the Supreme Court, and that the SC will decide that there is enough of an issue here to rule on.
In any case, the Ruling from Judge Alsup talks about what the precedents are from other jurisdictions, and the result should stand up well everywhere.
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw) Posted May 31, 2012 23:19 UTC (Thu) by clemenstimpler (guest, #71914) [Link]
Particularly, because the order includes a "Java 101" tutorial and discusses precedent very thoroughly. It is well worth reading in its entirety (as usual, Groklaw will provide a full-text version), because it injects some common sense in the discussion on copyright and APIs. Judge Alsup was clearly aware of the impact this order might have in subsequent proceedings. It may be suspected that certain CEO egos may press for an appeal anyway, but in my view the judge has quite effectively prevented any attempts to confuse the court of appeals, because he clearly conveys the impression that he knows what he is talking about and the way he introduces fundamental concepts of computing languages is accessible even to the layman.
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw) Posted Jun 1, 2012 11:57 UTC (Fri) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link]
If you read Groklaw, you will have come across the place where Judge Alsup drops a bombshell ...
After Oracle's lawyers have been spouting about how valuable timsort is and how Google have "saved themselves masses of valuable effort" by "copying" rangecheck, what does he go and say ... ?
He's done a fair bit of programming in his time, he's learnt Java especially for the case, and he himself wrote a rangesort several times in several different languages to see how difficult it was. iirc it took him an afternoon.
Cheers,
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw) Posted Jun 11, 2012 20:53 UTC (Mon) by jospoortvliet (subscriber, #33164) [Link]
Where did you find that, I don't see anything like that... Read the whole thing on Groklaw :D
Or did I read the wrong document... ?
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw) Posted Jun 11, 2012 21:50 UTC (Mon) by sfeam (subscriber, #2841) [Link] Groklaw link
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw) Posted Jun 1, 2012 13:53 UTC (Fri) by sorpigal (subscriber, #36106) [Link] The mini introduction to java was, IMO, the best part. Maybe someone can convince him to write some man pages...
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw) Posted Jun 2, 2012 9:50 UTC (Sat) by storner (subscriber, #119) [Link]
Oracle said they would appeal.
Even if they don't, this verdict was handed down in the Ninth Circuit which covers most (all?) of Silicon Valley. So it will probably be "the law" for most of the US IT-tech companies.
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw) Posted Jun 2, 2012 20:49 UTC (Sat) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw) Posted Jun 4, 2012 1:17 UTC (Mon) by butlerm (subscriber, #13312) [Link]
Most of it, anyway. Utah, Wyoming, Colorado and New Mexico are part of the Tenth Circuit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_courts_of_appeals
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw) Posted Jun 2, 2012 14:55 UTC (Sat) by jjs (guest, #10315) [Link]
By definition they are only precedent in their jurisdiction. If the 9th Circuit agrees with Judge Alsup, it becomes precedent in 9th Circuit. So on going up.
However, just because it's not precedent doesn't mean other courts can't use it as a point of reasoning - EU decisions are NOT precedent in the US, but the US courts have looked at their line of reasoning and agreed.
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw) Posted Jun 3, 2012 19:17 UTC (Sun) by ajk (subscriber, #6607) [Link]
The decision is not binding precedent at all. District Court judgments bind the parties but nobody else. Of course, other courts may adopt the court's reasoning if they feel like it.
IANAL and not even a US resident :-)
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw) Posted Jun 1, 2012 14:54 UTC (Fri) by robert_s (subscriber, #42402) [Link]
"Judge Alsup Rules"
Yup. We know.
I'm seriously considering getting some Judge Alsup posters printed up.
Judge Alsup Rules: Oracle's Java APIs are Not Copyrightable (Groklaw) Posted Jun 2, 2012 19:34 UTC (Sat) by jzbiciak (✭ supporter ✭, #5246) [Link] +1 ;-) Seriously, it sounds like he really did his homework on this one, and provided a complete, thoughtful and (one hopes) airtight justification for his ruling. That said, thoughtfulness pervades the ruling. For example, I thought this was a bit of genius: For their task of determining infringement and fair use, the jury was told it should take for granted that the structure, sequence and organization of the 37 API packages as a whole was copyrightable. This, however, was not a final definitive legal ruling. One reason for this instruction was so that if the judge ultimately ruled, after hearing the phase one evidence, that the structure, sequence and organization in question was not protectable but was later reversed in this regard, the court of appeals might simply reinstate the jury verdict. In this way, the court of appeals would have a wider range of alternatives without having to worry about an expensive retrial. Counsel were so informed but not the jury. That means everyone knows what the stakes are up the appeals chain and at least everything is on the table. I would imagine it limits the ability for Oracle to wiggle their argument around differently also, though IANAL. At least it sounds like it bounds what a jury can decide to what this jury decided. In general, Judge Alsup's ruling is a pleasure to read so far. He's really taken the time to explain everything clearly, and leave little question of how he's arrived at his decision. An Oracle will have quite some work to do to justify a reversal to an appeals court and that court will have to make some serious mental leaps, IMHO.
|
|||||||||||||