To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
On April 5, 2021, the United States Supreme Court handed down a decision that could have profound implications in the software industry. It held 6-2 that Google’s copying of 11,500 lines of code from Oracle’s Java SE API in Google’s Android platform was a fair and transformative use
The Court pushed the boundaries of the “transformative” test beyond determining whether the use is different than the copyright holder’s intended use, handing Google a major legal victory in a case with extremely high stakes.
When Google designed its Android platform, it made it free to developers to allow them to build applications for smartphones that, in the words of the Court, “make the phone better.”
Share This -
x
On 5th April 2021 the United States Supreme Court (USSC) finally delivered its verdict on the most keenly watched copyright dispute of this century. USSC s 6-2 decision is a big win for Google as it overturned the 2018 decision of Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit which decided in favour of Oracle. USSC held that Google s use of the Java Application Program Interface was a fair use as a matter of law.
Origins of the Dispute
The case started in 2010 when Oracle filed a law suit against Google in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (District Court) for both patent and copyright infringement. The main allegation of Oracle was that Google s unauthorised use of 37 packages of Oracle s Java Application Programming Interface (API) in its Android operating system infringed the patents and copyright of Oracle. An API divides and arranges the world of computing tasks in a particular manner and programmers can then use the API
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
Financial institutions, debt collectors, and consumer-facing businesses should take note that the United States Supreme Court has ruled that the definition of an “autodialer” under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, as written, requires that the device must use a random or sequential number generator. This narrow interpretation should shield companies from liability in current or future actions, where the consumers’ telephone numbers are known and not random or sequentially generated.
In
Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid, 592 U.S. (2021), the United States Supreme Court (“SCOTUS”) narrowly interpreted the definition of “autodialer” under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), holding the definition excludes equipment that does
United States Supreme Court Rules For Google In A Landmark Fair Use Decision - Intellectual Property mondaq.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from mondaq.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
CBS News
Is the Supreme Court too partisan? Here s what 3 reform proposals would do
Watch the CBSN Originals documentary Does the Supreme Court Need Reform? in the video player above. It premieres on CBSN Sunday, April 11, at 8 p.m., 11 p.m. and 2 a.m. ET.
In the closing days of the 2020 campaign, Joe Biden pledged in an interview with CBS News 60 Minutes that he would form a bipartisan commission of constitutional scholars to recommend options for reforming the U.S. Supreme Court and federal judiciary.
The idea of overhauling the makeup of the high court gained traction among progressives after the contentious and partisan confirmation fights over Justices Neil Gorsuch in 2017 and Brett Kavanaugh a year later, and especially after Republicans pushed through the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg right before the 2020 election solidifying a 6-3 conservative majority.