Andake your phone calls text messages. Later West Virginia senator shelley capital joins us. 8 00 p. M. After eastern last night, the first day of questions concluded for Supreme Court nominee judge Amy Coney Barrett. The second and final day of questions begins at 9 00 a. M. Eastern. They will be 20 minute rounds as opposed yesterdays 30 minutes. Welcome to washington journal on this wednesday, october 14. Starting at 9 00 in the Senate Judiciary committee, so a two hour program devoted to hearing from you and your reaction on what you heard from judge merrick yesterday. Here is how lines break up this morning. If you support the nominee, the line is 202 7488000. If you oppose her nomination, 202 7488001. If you are undecided about it, 202 7488002 send us a text. That line, 202 7488003. Make sure you include your name and where you are texting from. On twitter, we are cspanwj. It is facebook. Com cspan. As we have done over the last couple days, we will go over the committee. We shoul
Are admonished to give their attention. The court is now sitting. God save the United States and this honorable court. We will her argument for this morning in case 18 956, google versus oracle. Mister goldstein. Mister chief justice and may it please the court. The murder doctrine resolved the copyright issue in this case. Oracle has a copyright to the computer code in java sd but not a patent read that means the public not oracle has the right to its function and oral cannot create patent yrlike rights specifically under the murder doctrine there is no copyright protection for computer code that is theonly way to perform those functions. Your Java Software developers have the right to use certain commands to create applications for googles android smartphone platform but to work, the commands require google to reuse an exact set ofdeclarations from java sd like he fits into a lot. Because there are no substitutes, oracle is impermissibly claiming the exclusive right not merely to wha
Interrupted arguments. Then there will be questioning in order of that with judge lavalle first then me and then judge. You will begin and you have reserved three minutes for a rebuttal. Thank you your honor and good morning. Good morning. And may it please the court, on remand the president filed and raised two claims, first that the subpoena and overbroad fishing expedition. And second that it was issued in bad faith in order to harass the president. The District Attorney concedes the Supreme Court is author of the president bring these claims in federal court on remand. The only issue then, on appeal, is whether the allegations of bad faith or plausible. The District Courts determination that they are not could be reversed for several reasons. First, the court stacked the deck against the president by serving these president s are disguised attempt to re litigate category community. The District Attorney also concedes they claim they are no not. The clot plausibility standard to be
The honorable chief justice of the honorable associate justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. Mr. Goldstein mr. Chief justice may please the court with that copyright ability question in this case and into the computer work that not the patent so that means the public not oracle has the right to function and oracle cannot leverage the copyright there is no copyright protection for computer code to perform those functions here Java Software developers have the right to create applications for the smart android platform but they require google to reuse the exact set of declarations it is intermittently claiming the rights not just to what the declaration says is not a copyright it is a patent right. And in the modern Interoperable Software here reusing to rewrite creative applications that are used more than 1 billion people those policy questions are almost academic not whether this court would find fair use the much narrower question they could find fair use in oracle now
The copyright ability question in this case. Oracle has a copyright to the computer code in java. Right to the functions and oracle cannot leverage the copyright to create patent rights. Under their murder doctrine there is no copyright protection for computer code that is the only way to perform those functions. Java developers have the right to use certain commands to create applications for google, android platforms. To work the commands require google to reduce a set of declarations from java fc. Because there are no substitutes oracle is claiming the exclusive right not merely to what the declaration is saying but to what they do. That is not a copyright, it is a patent right. Reusingtice of interface is critical to commuter software. Reusing the declaration allowed developers to write billions of creative applications that are used by more than a billion people. Those policy questions are almost academic because the issue is not one this court would find fair use. The standard of