2. Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc. Date Argued: 10/07/20
Court Transcriipt (written word) read to page 20
https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcriipts/2020/18-956_2dp3.pdf
Oral Argument (spoken word) listen up to 34.52 https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2020/18-956
A brief summary/background of the case is as follows:
Oracle America, Inc., owns a copyright in Java SE, a computer platform that uses the popular Java computer programming language. In 2005, Google acquired Android and sought to build a new software platform for mobile devices. To allow the millions of programmers familiar with the Java programming language to work with its new Android platform, Google copied roughly 11,500 lines of code from the Java SE program. The copied lines are part of a tool called an Application Programming Interface (API). An API allows programmers to call upon prewritten computing tasks for use in their own programs.
The lower courts have considered (1) whether Java SE’s owner could copyright the copied lines from the API, and (2) if so, whether Google’s copying constituted a permissible “fair use” of that material freeing Google from copyright liability. The Federal Circuit held that the copied lines are copyrightable. After a jury then found for Google on fair use, the Federal Circuit reversed, concluding that Google’s copying was not a fair use as a matter of law.
Issue: The Supreme Court agreed to review the Federal Circuit’s determinations as to both copyrightability and fair use.
Holding: The US Supreme Court determined that Google’s copying of the Java SE API, which included only those lines of code that were needed to allow programmers to put their accrued talents to work in a new and transformative program, was a fair use of that material as a matter of law. pp. 11–36 of the transcriipt.
After reading the transcriipt and listening to the audio of the oral argument of EITHER the Facebook or Google cases please respond to the following queries:
Identify the parties/people mentioned in the portion of the transcriipt you read and the oral argument you heard.
Do you believe the attorney, for the petitioner (Mr. Clement-Facebook case or Mr. Goldstein-Google case), seemed more effective based on your reading of the transcriipt or when listening to the statements and responses to the justices’ questions?
During the questioning of the petitioner’s attorneys, which U.S. Supreme Court Justice stood out in your opinion? and Why?
Provide an interesting or thought-provoking comment from one of the U.S Supreme Court Justice that helped you envision what the justice was explaining or asking the attorney.
Overall, which medium or method of communication did you prefer, the court transcriipt (written word) or the oral argument (spoken word)? and Why?