Short answer: the Oracle v. Google API case told software companies that APIs and even functional code can be copyrightable, that these disputes are intensely fact-specific, and that proving copyrightability is far easier than proving infringement.
On May 9, 2014, the appellate court handed down its 69-page decision in the Oracle v. Google API copyright case. The court ruled in favor of Oracle but sent some issues back to the lower court. As a software licensing attorney, I see these API and licensing-scope questions come up constantly. A few takeaways for software and SaaS companies.
Thin Slicing the Code.
One clear theme is that courts do not treat all software as equal. They look very closely at the actual code, how it was created, how it works, what functions it performs, and at the allegedly infringing code the same way. These cases are intensely fact-specific and can become very expensive to litigate.
Functions and Short Phrases May Be Copyrighted.
The court made clear that performing a function (or being a short phrase) does not automatically make something uncopyrightable. Even if an element is functional, like “File,” “Print,” or “Quit,” the code that implements it may carry original expression and be copyrightable. This sits against the rule that ideas and methods of operation themselves are not protected under 17 U.S.C. section 102(b), which is the line these cases fight over.
An API With Many Possible Expressions May Be Protected.
Good news for software companies with APIs: the law tends to protect API design more than people previously assumed. Where an interface could have been written many ways, the particular expression chosen can carry copyright.
Copyrightability vs. Infringement Are Different Bars.
Proving that something is subject to copyright protection is a fairly low bar. Proving that someone actually infringed it is not. (Years later the Supreme Court resolved the dispute on fair use grounds, which only underscores how fact-specific the infringement question is.) The practical lesson for a vendor is to treat your API design and documentation as protectable expression, and to handle others’ APIs with the same respect you would want for your own. That is also why you want a real API license agreement defining what developers may do.
Frequently Asked Questions.
Can I copyright my API? Potentially yes. Oracle v. Google held that API structure and declaring code can carry original expression, especially where the interface could have been written many different ways.
Does functional code get copyright protection? It can. Performing a function does not make code uncopyrightable; the implementing code often contains protectable expression, even though the underlying idea or method is not protected.
If my API is copyrightable, am I protected from copying? Not automatically. Copyrightability is a low bar; proving infringement (and overcoming fair use) is much harder and very fact-specific.
This decision turned on how Java works, how it was designed, and how Google implemented it. Change the facts and the outcome may differ. I hope this helps.
For the wider pattern of how software-licensing disputes get litigated, see how the Leegin case changed software reseller law, and for the IP frame, Intellectual Property Basics for Software Companies.
Resources:
Appellate Opinion, May 9, 2014
Disclaimer:
This post is for informational and educational purposes only, and is not legal advice. You should hire an attorney if you need legal advice, which should be provided only after review of all relevant facts and applicable law.
Discover more from Aber Law Firm
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.