The US Law Case of Oracle versus Google: Inclusion to the European Union copyright protection of the Application Program Interfaces (APIs).
Abstract
Purpose: As the government embraces the growth of technology, it should as well recognize the piracy issue surrounding software development. On that note, it should facilitate as well as protect personal creativity and innovation of ideas. Bearing in mind that many technology experts have sort legal regarding copyrights and patents. Hence, the objective of the study is to assess the importance and appropriateness of the US law case of Oracle v. Google’s involvement in the European Union copyright protection of the Application Program Interfaces (APIs). Methodology. The researcher will randomly recruit 100 participants (computer engineers and law enforcers) from different institutions. Share questionnaires and also interview them to collect data. Then engage both qualitative and quantitative technics to analyze the data. The results measure involves the independence capacity of software developers, strength, and coverage of the copyright policies within the European nations compared to that of the United States (US). Results. The researcher expect the majority of participants to respond by sharing their experience regarding copyright cases and the current position. Additionally, embrace the involvement of the US law case of Oracle v. Google in the EU as a solution to APIs’ copyright guidelines. Conclusion. Evaluating the situation of software development protection in the EU will point out the existing gaps. Besides, analyzing the quality and importance of the US law case of Oracle v. Google will equip policymakers with sufficient alternatives regarding the best approach to the protection of APIs developers. Perhaps, they might be the need for the government to invest more in law and technology as a way of combating cases of copyrights.
Keywords: Software developers’ capacity, quality of Oracle v. Google case, the strength of the existing APIs protection policies.
Importance of including the US law case of Oracle versus Google in the European Union copyright protection of the Application Program Interfaces (APIs).
The development of the technology/software industry has created several job opportunities which have boosted various governments’ economy. On the contrary, it has as well opened windows for people to use others’ work without proper permission, which raises the need for policy review governing patent and copyright. Consequently, such practices attract Application Program Interfaces (APIs) copyright disagreement, which calls for law society intervention to stipulate guidance, direction, and protection on software application and usage. The US law case of Oracle versus Google attracted several legal opinions, which enabled it to gain popularity and attention from different nations across the world and, for that matter European Union (EU) is on the verge of considering it in policies governing the copyright specifically on APIs.
Literature Review
The popularly used and know computer language is Java, which is severally mentioned in the case of Oracle and Google. Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft claim that Sun Microsystems (“Sun”) was the original developer of Java platform back in the 1990s, which gained popularity and embraced by many developers across the globe due to its “write once, run anywhere” features. Thus, software developers can use one operating system to write Java programs, and after that, run the program using different operating systems. However, for the program to run correctly, it require Java Application Programming Interface (“Java API”), which was the core source of the Oracle and Google disagreement. The APIs involves declaration and implementing codes originating from preexisting functions. Perhaps, Sun encouraged future programmers to apply preexisting code from Java APIs to directly and practically come up with new software. As a result, Google adopted the idea to develop Android smartphone by incorporating a small portion of Java APIs declaration code and its own implementing code with an assumption that declaration code is not copyrightable. That happened after an unsuccessful attempt by Google to get permission to use Java APIs from Sun. Hence, upon acquisition of Sun by Oracle America, Inc., the legal procedure to enforce Java license started, which resulted in suing Google Company for copyright violation.
Oracle and Google have severally engaged in a serious legal fight on the APIs copyright, either party striving to prove the viability of its argument. Oracle accused Google of illegally copying its Java code, whereas the Google claims to use such codes in a fair use perspective. The case attracted different views from different legal firms as they attempted to interpret the copyright policies as wells as find the best solution on the matter at hand. For example, Claburn reveals that a number of amicus curiae (friends of the court) claimed that if the court rules the case in favor of the Oracle, then there could be collateral damages in that many artists subsume other peoples’ content references to various jobs such as mechanical repairs. On the contrary, some argued that, if the court decides to side with Google there will be a software interoperability issues as witnessed in Europe. Consequently, people struggle through various ways to earn a living, which the growth of technology is playing major part and as a result, as nations look for ways to protect the work of others from piracy, they should also consider the job opportunities that come along the practices. During the hearing of Oracle and Google case the legal team at one point considered the European copyright protection policy, which means there is some connection even though the case is in progress. Hence, the importance of the EU to consider the case to find strategies which case speed up the hearing and conclusion and cope up with the most appropriate police to protect APIs within the region.
Nevertheless, software development is an expensive investment which requires sufficient protection. Precisely, the creation of APIs which forms the bases of any software development. Call & Peacock reveals that computer programs can course massive damage to companies and even individual persons if exposed to hackers which steers software developer to seek protection of the APIs. Hansen claim that Oracle and other software developers seek enforcement of APIs license because if left uncontrolled some programmers may leak crucial information to unauthorized third parties who can end up leading fraud on companies like financial institutions. Bearing in mind that many software developers relay on already existing APIs. Band suggests that any decision by the government will have a greater effect on the development of interoperable systems which will as well impact nations’ economy. Software developers companies, such as Oracle invests adequately, and for that reason, they would like proper copyright protection which would require compensation whenever any developer wants to use their APIs. On the other hand, if the court decides to ask developers to come up with their own Java codes, it will have a significant negative impact since many will not afford noting that many application share such codes. Consequently, there will be little scrapping of many application especially on smartphone market. Sondhi, Chu, Kim & Brydon reveals that smartphone software application programmers relay largely on software developers, due to the technicalities involved in phone software compared to computers. Robertson claims that applying copyright on APIs which Oracles is pushing for will lead to monopolizing creativity which obstructs interoperability of software tools.
Various attempt to finalize the case failed due to the primary evaluation and determination of the practicability of protection surrounding merge doctrine (where copyrightable idea integrates with non-copyrightable one). Further, there is arguments surrounding the applicability general patents and copyright protection to APIs. Ciancarini, Russo, Sillitti and Succi claims that the US policies on computer programs are quite pronounced which enhances developers to find their own innovative and creativity to avoid legal fines in the event of violation of copyright, whereas in European nations seems to be barely restrictive on copyright with an assumption that principles or ideas are not copyrightable. Hence, a number of programmers end up slightly twisting others programming works which does not go well with original developers, thus the need for review of such policies. Contrary, Springman argues that unrestricted APIs usage have created favorable competition attracting wide range of innovation thereby keeping the cost of software and technology at large in an affordable price. Additionally, according to the internet protocol, every person is free to use pass a message or develop a serve observing the Hypertext Transfer Protocol. For example, competition in open source operating system could exist due to software compatibility that opens the interfaces allowing more development of proprietary platforms. Perhaps, the US case of Oracle and Google revealed significant issues that requires close consideration to unsure every person right is protected. Springman suggest that despite that fact that the law personalities have not been able to give a verdict on the case of Oracle and Google, keeping copyright out of APIs will create a favorable competition, attract more investors and more importantly keep the industry healthy. Vaughan-Nichols argues that much more modern software uses open APIs and the move to apply copyright on APIs is unrealistic. For example, many people use their mobile phone to check weather forecast which relays basically on existing APIs to link services, servers and one’s device.
In conclusion, software and technology industry is fast growing attracting all kinds of activities which requires proper guidance and protection. The industry needs heavy investment which propelled Oracle to seek legal intervention after Google incorporated its Java APIs declaration code to programs Android applications. Both parties have been in and out of courts in attempt to get clear interpretation and protection regarding APIs copyright protection. The case is critical considering the effect it may have on other software developers if ruled in favor of Oracle, as well as its effect on Oracle and other software (APIs) developers. European nations has minimal software protection, which reduces innovativeness as creativity as people easily copy others works, and therefore it can add value in the industry if tighter policies are imposed. Hence, the need to consider involvement in the Oracle and Google case, which however requires close analysis bearing in mind the concrete opinions it received from different law expertise and computer engineers.
Reference
Adi Robertson. (2020). As Google heads to the Supreme Court, Oracle takes aim at its industry
allies. Retrieved from:
https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/19/21142366/google-supreme-court-oracle-java
Band, J. (2015). The Protectability of Application Program Interfaces: Oracle America v.
Google. Google (August 14, 2015).
Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP (2020). Google v. Oracle: Will Software Be Free? JD Supra.
Retrieved from:
https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/google-v-oracle-will-software-be-free-76778/
Ciancarini P, Russo D, Sillitti A, Succi G. A guided tour of the legal implications of software
cloning. InProceedings of the 38th International Conference on Software Engineering
Companion 2016 May 14 (pp. 563-572).
Call, J. D., & Peacock, T. D. (2017). US Patent No. 9,729,506. Washington, DC: US Patent and
Trademark Office.
Hansen M, inventor; Shape Security Inc, assignee. Using individualized APIs to block automated
attacks on native apps and/or purposely exposed APIs with forced user interaction. United
States patent US 10,050,935. 2018 Aug 14.
Sondhi, A., Chu, C. W., Kim, B., & Brydon, S. (2015). US Patent No. 9,081,951. Washington,
DC: US Patent and Trademark Office.
Sprigman, C. J. (2015). Oracle v. Google: a high-stakes legal fight for the software
industry. Communications of the ACM, 58(5), 27-29.
Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols (2020). The Supreme Court will decide software development’s future
in Google v. Oracle. ZDNet. Retrieved from:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/the-supreme-court-will-decide-software-developments-
- Claburn. (2020). IBM, Microsoft, a medley of others sing support for Google against Oracle
in Supremes’ Java API copyright case. Legal war could rest on nineteenth century mapping
ruling by past court. The Register. Retrieved from:
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/01/15/google_oracle_api/