Android War: Google Asks US Supreme Court to Take Up Appeal of Oracle's Copyright Victory
Lawyers for Google wrote that if Oracle's win at the Federal Circuit is allowed to stand, it would "upend the longstanding expectation of software developers that they are free to use existing software interfaces to build new computer programs."
January 24, 2019 at 05:24 PM
3 minute read
Lawyers for Google LLC have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take up an appeal of its loss to Oracle in a blockbuster copyright case involving the software underpinning the Android mobile operating system.
Google's petition for certiorari, filed with the court Thursday, claims that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit erred by finding that no reasonable jury could have found Google's unlicensed copying of Oracle-owned software interfaces in Android was a fair use under copyright law.
The Federal Circuit last March reversed the fair use finding of a jury trial that was overseen by U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California, a little less than four years after the appellate court reversed Alsup's finding that the software interfaces weren't copyrightable following an earlier trial.
Google's appellate team, led by Kannon Shanmugam of Williams & Connolly, wrote in Thursday's brief that the Federal Circuit's two rulings amounted to “a devastating one-two punch at the software industry.”
“If allowed to stand, the Federal Circuit's approach will upend the longstanding expectation of software developers that they are free to use existing software interfaces to build new computer programs,” wrote Google's lawyers, which also included Goldstein & Russell's Thomas Goldstein and Robert Van Nest of Keker, Van Nest & Peters, among others. “Developers who have invested in learning free and open programming languages such as Java will be unable to use those skills to create programs for new platforms—a result that will undermine both competition and innovation,” the lawyers continued.
In a company blog post Thursday, Google SVP of Global Affairs and Chief Legal Officer Kent Walker wrote that the U.S. Constitution “authorized copyrights to 'promote the progress of science and useful arts,' not to impede creativity or promote lock-in of software platforms.”
“We support software developers' ability to develop the applications we all have come to use every day, and we hope that the Supreme Court will give this case the serious and careful consideration it deserves,” Walker wrote.
In a statement provided by an Oracle representative, Dorian Daley, the company's executive vice president, general counsel, and secretary, said that Google's brief provides “a rehash of arguments that have already been thoughtfully and thoroughly discredited.”
“The fabricated concern about innovation hides Google's true concern: that it be allowed the unfettered ability to copy the original and valuable work of others for substantial financial gain,” Daley said.
|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 AllTrellis Launches Trellis AI, a New Suite of Automated Litigation Tools
3 minute readAI Startup Founder Defrauded Investors of Millions, US Prosecutors Say
3 minute readJudge Rejects Meta’s Plea to Send FTC Antitrust Suit to Trash Heap
Quantum Computing Company to Part With General Counsel
Trending Stories
- 1Democrats Give Up Circuit Court Picks for Trial Judges in Reported Deal with GOP
- 2Trump Taps Former Fla. Attorney General for AG
- 3Newsom Names Two Judges to Appellate Courts in San Francisco, Orange County
- 4Biden Has Few Ways to Protect His Environmental Legacy, Say Lawyers, Advocates
- 5UN Treaty Enacting Cybercrime Standards Likely to Face Headwinds in US, Other Countries
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