SG's Office Recommends Against Cert in Google v. Oracle
Noel Francisco's office tells the Supreme Court that Oracle's Java APIs are copyrightable, and that Google's use of them wasn't fair.
September 27, 2019 at 08:26 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
The new solicitor general doesn't like Google's Supreme Court case against Oracle any more than the old solicitor general did.
SG Noel Francisco's office formally recommended to the Supreme Court on Friday that it deny certiorari in the nine-year-old copyright battle between Silicon Valley titans. The office rejected Google LLC's arguments that the declaring code that organizes Java application programming interfaces can not be copyrighted. It also turned away Google's argument that using the code to make its Android operating system interoperable with Java was a fair use.
"The fair-use doctrine does not permit copying valuable parts of a work to attract fans to a competing commercial product," the office stated in in its brief.
Google is asking the Supreme Court for a second time to review the case, after prevailing twice in San Francisco federal court then suffering reversals each time by the Federal Circuit. Absent Supreme Court intervention, the case will go back for a third trial, this time on damages, with Oracle America Inc. seeking many billions of dollars. Oracle also has accused other Google products beyond smartphones of infringing.
Each time the Supreme Court has asked the SG's office for its views on the case. The office under Donald Verrilli recommended that the court deny cert in 2015, saying the Federal Circuit was correct that the APIs are copyrightable and that Google still had the opportunity to present its fair use defense. The court denied cert.
Jurors then found Google's use was fair in 2016, but the Federal Circuit again reversed, saying no reasonable jury could have found fair use.
On Friday, the solicitor general reaffirmed its stance on copyrightability. "Both declaring code and implementing code ultimately perform the same practical function: They instruct a computer to work," the brief states.
As for fair use, there were a few caveats. "Although a jury verdict should not be lightly set aside, the court's decision was correct," the brief states. In the end, "the court of appeals simply endorsed the unremarkable proposition that wholesale copying of thousands of lines of copyrighted code into a competing commercial product for the purpose of attracting developers familiar with the copyright owner's work, while causing actual commercial harm to the copyright owner, is not fair use."
Also signing onto the brief were Deputy AG Joseph Hunt, Deputy SG Malcolm Stewart, and DOJ attorneys Mark Freeman, Daniel Tenny and Sonia Carson. Stewart, Freeman and Carson were also signatories to the SG's 2015 brief.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLitigator of the Week: Reversing a $2B Trade Secret Verdict, the Largest in Va. History
Litigators of the Week: Irell Duo Lands Another Big West Texas Win, This Time $240M for StreamScale
Litigators of the Week: In Delaware Chancery Trial, Latham Defends Oracle's $9.3B NetSuite Deal
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250