On Monday, the Supreme Court, along with Google (GOOG, GOOGL), had a $ 9 billion copyright dispute with Oracle (ORCL) over software in billions of Android phones, in a ruling that the Electronic Frontier Foundation called a “fantastic victory” for smaller businesses. to innovate.
In the 6-2 opinion of Justice Stephen Breyer, the court found that Google did not violate copyright law when it used portions of Oracle’s Oracle’s Java application program interface to build the Android operating system. According to Google, the copying is “fair use”, which means that Google did not have to get permission from Oracle before using it.
“The fair use analysis will really set a precedent that will set a serious precedent for many years to come,” Corynne McSherry, legal director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which filed an amicus order on behalf of Google, told Yahoo. Finance.
“It’s really a fantastic win,” McSherry said, adding that the verdict means “other small businesses trying to invent” can I do this creative new innovative thing where I might have to build on someone else’s work? ‘will have more ease that will eventually be found legal what they do. ”
The case focused on application programming interfaces (APIs), computer code rules that, as Google explains, enable software applications, platforms, and devices to talk to each other.
‘Profound consequences for innovation’
In the ten-year-long case, Oracle claims that Google violated copyright law by using the Java languages’ APIs to build Android, the world’s most popular mobile operating system. Google resisted by saying that the copying was used fairly, and asked the court to overturn an appeal court favoring Oracle, which is demanding $ 9 billion in damages.
The case has attracted dozens of amicus topics that support both sides, including one of co-technology giant Microsoft (MSFT) – which came out in support of Google and noted that the issue presented by the case “has profound consequences for innovation in today’s computer industry ”.
In a statement, Kent Walker, Google’s SVP of Global Affair, said the court’s ruling was a victory for consumers, interoperability and computer science.
‘The decision gives legal certainty to the next generation of developers whose new products and services will benefit consumers. We are very grateful for the support of a wide range of organizations, from the National Consumers League to the American Library Association, as well as from established companies, start-ups and the country’s leading software engineers and copyright scientists. ”
However, Dorian Daley, Oracle’s executive vice president and general counsel, said the court’s ruling simply makes Google’s platform bigger and more powerful.
“They stole Java and ran it for a decade like only a monopolist can,” Daley said in a statement. “This is exactly why regulators around the world and in the United States are investigating Google’s business practices.”
According to the judges, Google’s use of the Java API was fair use because ‘the copied code lines are part of a’ user interface ‘that gives programmers a way to access pre-written computer code using simple commands. ‘
In its ruling, which was supported by Breyer, Chief Justice John Roberts, as well as Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch, the court found that the Java API is different from other types of computer code.
They noted that “the copied lines are inherently merged with non-copyrighted ideas (the overall organization of the API) and the creation of new creative expression (the code independently written by Google).”
According to Professor Tyler Ochoa of the Santa Clara University School of Law’s High Tech Law Institute, the court’s ruling does not mean that software programs can be largely copied, but that the implementation of application software interfaces can be used under fair use.
“They very much emphasized the distinction between declaring code and implementing code, and suggested that declaring code is subject to much less protection than implementing code,” Ochoa explained.
“Computer programs are still copyright-free, and the code for computer programs is still copyright-free,” he said. “According to the court, the structure of a user interface may have been copied by someone who implements the interface in a different way.”
The Supreme Court’s ruling puts an end to just one legal battle for Google, which is facing pending antitrust cases, including one from the Department of Justice and two others from dozens of state attorneys.
-Additional reporting by Erin Fuchs
Subscribe to Yahoo Finance Tech Newsletter
A tip? Send an email to Daniel Howley at [email protected] via encrypted mail at [email protected], and follow him on Twitter at @DanielHowley.
More from Dan:
Follow Yahoo Finance on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Flipboard, SmartNews, LinkedIn, Youtube, en reddit. Find live stock market quotes and the latest business and finance newsConsult Cashay for tutorials and information on investing and trading stocks.