🤑 It doesn’t get more affordable. Grab this 60% OFF Black Friday offer before it disappears…CLAIM SALE

Obama administration asks U.S. top court to decline Google copyright appeal

Published 27/05/2015, 00:23
© Reuters. A logo is pictured at Google's European Engineering Center in Zurich
ORCL
-
GOOGL
-

By Lawrence Hurley and Dan Levine

WASHINGTON/SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - The Obama administration on Tuesday sided against Google Inc (O:GOOGL) and said the U.S. Supreme Court should not hear the company's appeal in a case against Oracle Corp (N:ORCL) with wide implications for the technology industry, according to a court filing.

The case involves how much copyright protection should extend to the Java programming language. Oracle won a federal appeals court ruling last year that allows it to copyright parts of Java, while Google argues it should be free to use Java without paying a licensing fee.

Google, which used Java to design its Android smartphone operating system, appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The high court then asked the Obama administration in January for its opinion on whether it should take the case because the federal government has a strong interest.

The Federal Trade Commission, for instance, must ensure companies do not break antitrust laws when claiming software copyright protection against each other.

According to Google, an Oracle victory would obstruct "an enormous amount of innovation" because software developers would not be able to freely build on each others' work. But Oracle says effective copyright protection is the key to software innovation.

In the court filing on Tuesday, U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli said Google's argument that the code is not entitled to copyright protection lacks merit and did not need to be reviewed by the Supreme Court.

Verrilli added that Google had raised important concerns about the effect that enforcement of Oracle's copyright could have on software development, but said those issues could be addressed via further proceedings on Google's separate "fair use" defence in San Francisco federal court.

The Supreme Court could better assess the issues, Verrilli said, if it had all relevant legal arguments before it at the same time.

The Obama administration had been locked in internal wrangling over what position to take in the high-profile litigation between the two American technology companies.

Google has a close relationship with the Obama administration. However, there is no indication that the internal debate on software copyright involves any issues beyond legal policy.

The nine justices request that Verrilli, as the Obama administration's top lawyer before the Supreme Court, weigh in on about 20 cases a year in which the federal government has a strong interest.

The justices generally give greater weight to what a solicitor general says than other third parties that take a side in a case. This influence has caused the solicitor general to be dubbed the "10th justice."

The Supreme Court is expected to decide whether to hear the case by the end of its term in June.

"We appreciate the solicitor general's careful review of this issue, however we're disappointed with these conclusions," Google said in a statement.

Oracle said it was "pleased" with the recommendation, which "affirms the importance of copyright protection as an incentive for software innovation."

© Reuters. A logo is pictured at Google's European Engineering Center in Zurich

The case is Google v. Oracle, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 14-410.

Latest comments

Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2024 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.