Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc.

Supreme Court of the United States · 2021 · Property

PropertyCopyrightFair UseComputer ProgramsAPIsfair useAPIdeclaring code

Facts

Google acquired Android and built a new software platform for smartphones. To let programmers already familiar with Java work easily in that new environment, Google wrote its own implementing code but copied about 11,500 lines of Java SE API declaring code for 37 packages, which let programmers use familiar method calls to access tasks. The copied code was part of a user interface that linked programmers' commands to prewritten tasks and reflected an organizational system of methods, classes, and packages. Google copied only a small fraction of the total Java SE API, while writing millions of lines of new code for Android.

Issue

Assuming the copied Java SE API material was copyrightable, did Google's copying of the API's declaring code and organizational structure for use in Android constitute fair use as a matter of law? A related issue was whether the ultimate fair use determination is for the jury or for judges to decide.

Rule

Fair use under 17 U.S.C. §107 is a flexible, context-based inquiry that applies fully to computer programs. The ultimate fair use determination is a legal question for judges to decide de novo, while reviewing courts defer to jury findings on underlying facts. In evaluating fair use, courts apply the statutory factors with sensitivity to the functional character of computer programs, including whether the copying was transformative, how closely the copied material is bound up with uncopyrightable ideas and user investment, whether the amount taken was tethered to a valid transformative purpose, and whether enforcement would harm rather than promote copyright's creativity objectives.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

A jury in Seattle finds that Nova Harbor Systems made fair use when it copied part of an older software interface for a new in-car operating system. On appeal, the copyright owner argues that the appellate court must uphold the verdict so long as substantial evidence supports it, while Nova Harbor argues the jury's ultimate fair-use determination controls.

How should the appellate court review the fair-use issue under the governing doctrine?

Explanation. The majority held that fair use is a mixed question of law and fact. Reviewing courts defer to jury findings on underlying facts, but the ultimate question whether those facts amount to fair use is a legal question for judges to decide de novo. (Derived from Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc. (n.d.).)