Oracle v Google: Copyright protection on functional elements of computer programs that puts at risk the interoperability and innovation
Abstract
Oracle v. Google case provides a good opportunity of reflection about the scope of software copyright protection as functional works. This case is about Google’s using of Application Programming Interfaces (APIs), developed by Sun (Oracle today) as part of Java programming language created with the purpose to standardizer communication between different layers of software. To develop Android in compatible way with Java language programmed softwares, Google took the hedgers and the sequence, structure and organization (SSO) of thirty-seven Java APIs. The case has a huge repercussion in the understanding of the scope of copyright protection over software that are by nature functional works. A review of the economic reality in software programing shows that there are important networks economies that software programing tries to achieve through interoperability by the development of standards. This reality should not be ignored at the time to design copyright policy around software protection, in order to prevent the damage to future innovation. If copyright fails in this task, antitrust law could be able to provide some remedies that are explored here. /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Tabla normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Cambria","serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-ansi-language:ES-TRAD; mso-fareast-language:ES;}Keywords:
software, API, interoperability, copyright, antitrust.References
Comisión Europea (2009). «Comunicación de la Comisión: Orientaciones sobre las prioridades de control de la Comisión en su aplicación del artículo 82 del Tratado CE a la conducta excluyente abusiva de las empresas dominantes». Diario Oficial Unión Europea, 24 de febrero, pp. 7-20. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1ZmuyYw>.
Curtis, Bill (1989). «Engineering computer “look and feel”: User interface technology and human factors engineering». Jurimetrics Journal, 30 (1): 51-78. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1SPYWLe>.
Czapracka, Katarzyna (2007). «Where antitrust ends and IP begins. On the roots of the transatlantic clashes». Yale Journal of Law & Technology, 9 (1): 44-108. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/2023csT>.
Duane, Matthew (2006) «For the people and by the people: A new proposal for defining industry standards in computer software». Wake Forest Intellectual Property Law Journal, 7 (1): 97-143. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1RnzRHZ>.
Farrell, Joseph (1989). «Standardization and intellectual property». Jurimetrics Journal, 30 (1): 35-50. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1RnzXzd>.
Farrell, Joseph y Paul Klemperer (2006). «Coordination and lock-in: Competition with switching costs and network effects». En M. Armstrong y R. Porter (eds.), Handbook of industrial organization. Elsevier: Amsterdam. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/231liO4>.
Farrel, Joseph y Saloner Garth (1992). «Converters, compatibility, and the control of interfaces». The Journal of Industrial Economics, 40 (1): 9-35. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1P2y5vF>.
Gordon, Wendy y Robert Bone (2000). «Copyright». En B. Bouckaert y G. DeGeest (eds.), Edward Elgar, Encyclopedia of Law & Economics, 2: 189-223. Disponible en <http://encyclo.findlaw.com/1610book.pdf>.
Hardings, Jens (2008). «¿Por qué la ACTI pretende castrar la competitividad de las empresas que desarrolla(ría)n software en Chile?». Manzana Mecánica. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1l9KX58>.
Hovenkamp, Herbert (2013). «Innovation and competition policy». En Innovation, IP rights, and anticompetitive exclusion. University of Iowa Legal Studies Research Paper. Disponible en <http://ssrn.com/abstract=1946379>.
Kaiser, Hanno (2011). «Are ‘closed systems’ an antitrust problem?». Competition Policy International, 7 (1): 91-113. Disponible en <http://ssrn.com/abstract=1844944>.
Katz, Michael y Carl Shapiro (1994). «Systems competition and network effects». Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8 (2): 93-115. Disponible en <http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~scotch/katz_shapiro.pdf>.
Lemley, Mark A. y David McGowan (1998a). «Could Java change everything? The competitive propriety of a proprietary standard». Antitrust Bulletin, 43: 715-773. Disponible en <http://ssrn.com/abstract=57515>.
Lemley, Mark A. y David McGowan (1998b). «Legal implications of network economic effects». California Law Review, 86 (3): 479-611. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1OTisEI>.
Lemley, Mark. (2002). «Intellectual property rights and standard-setting organizations». California Law Review, 90: 1889-1890. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1nkWUXo>.
Martens, China (2006). «It’s official: Sun open sources Java». Java World. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1Q7Uxm8>.
Menell, Peter (1986). «Tailoring legal protection for computer software». Stanford Law Review, 39: 1329-1372. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1N9jt67>.
Samuelson, Pamela (2003). «Should economics play a role in copyright law and policy? ». University of Ottawa Law & Technology Journal, 1: 1-21. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1Q7UQx8>.
Samuelson, Pamela (2011). «The uneasy case for software copyrights revisited». George Washington Law Review, 79 (6): 1746-1782. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1TXButP>.
Samuelson, Pamela (2012). «Oracle v. Google: Are APIs copyrightable?». Communications of the ACM, 55 (11): 25-27. Disponible en <http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/facpubs/2354>.
Schellingerhout, Ruben y Piero Cavicchi (2010). «Patent ambush in standard-setting: the Commission accepts commitments from Rambus to lower memory chip royalty rates». Competition Policy Newsletter (European Commission), (1): 32-36. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1RPkG9f>.
Sliwa, Carol (1999). «Sun abandons Java standards effort». Computerworld. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1TXBOc5>.
Van Houweling, Molly (2005). «Distributive values in copyright». Texas Law Review, 83 (6): 1535-1579. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1OsTHM5>.
West, Joel (2003). «How open is open enough? Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies». Research Policy, 32 (7): 1259-1285. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/2025b0l>.
Curtis, Bill (1989). «Engineering computer “look and feel”: User interface technology and human factors engineering». Jurimetrics Journal, 30 (1): 51-78. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1SPYWLe>.
Czapracka, Katarzyna (2007). «Where antitrust ends and IP begins. On the roots of the transatlantic clashes». Yale Journal of Law & Technology, 9 (1): 44-108. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/2023csT>.
Duane, Matthew (2006) «For the people and by the people: A new proposal for defining industry standards in computer software». Wake Forest Intellectual Property Law Journal, 7 (1): 97-143. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1RnzRHZ>.
Farrell, Joseph (1989). «Standardization and intellectual property». Jurimetrics Journal, 30 (1): 35-50. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1RnzXzd>.
Farrell, Joseph y Paul Klemperer (2006). «Coordination and lock-in: Competition with switching costs and network effects». En M. Armstrong y R. Porter (eds.), Handbook of industrial organization. Elsevier: Amsterdam. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/231liO4>.
Farrel, Joseph y Saloner Garth (1992). «Converters, compatibility, and the control of interfaces». The Journal of Industrial Economics, 40 (1): 9-35. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1P2y5vF>.
Gordon, Wendy y Robert Bone (2000). «Copyright». En B. Bouckaert y G. DeGeest (eds.), Edward Elgar, Encyclopedia of Law & Economics, 2: 189-223. Disponible en <http://encyclo.findlaw.com/1610book.pdf>.
Hardings, Jens (2008). «¿Por qué la ACTI pretende castrar la competitividad de las empresas que desarrolla(ría)n software en Chile?». Manzana Mecánica. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1l9KX58>.
Hovenkamp, Herbert (2013). «Innovation and competition policy». En Innovation, IP rights, and anticompetitive exclusion. University of Iowa Legal Studies Research Paper. Disponible en <http://ssrn.com/abstract=1946379>.
Kaiser, Hanno (2011). «Are ‘closed systems’ an antitrust problem?». Competition Policy International, 7 (1): 91-113. Disponible en <http://ssrn.com/abstract=1844944>.
Katz, Michael y Carl Shapiro (1994). «Systems competition and network effects». Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8 (2): 93-115. Disponible en <http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~scotch/katz_shapiro.pdf>.
Lemley, Mark A. y David McGowan (1998a). «Could Java change everything? The competitive propriety of a proprietary standard». Antitrust Bulletin, 43: 715-773. Disponible en <http://ssrn.com/abstract=57515>.
Lemley, Mark A. y David McGowan (1998b). «Legal implications of network economic effects». California Law Review, 86 (3): 479-611. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1OTisEI>.
Lemley, Mark. (2002). «Intellectual property rights and standard-setting organizations». California Law Review, 90: 1889-1890. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1nkWUXo>.
Martens, China (2006). «It’s official: Sun open sources Java». Java World. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1Q7Uxm8>.
Menell, Peter (1986). «Tailoring legal protection for computer software». Stanford Law Review, 39: 1329-1372. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1N9jt67>.
Samuelson, Pamela (2003). «Should economics play a role in copyright law and policy? ». University of Ottawa Law & Technology Journal, 1: 1-21. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1Q7UQx8>.
Samuelson, Pamela (2011). «The uneasy case for software copyrights revisited». George Washington Law Review, 79 (6): 1746-1782. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1TXButP>.
Samuelson, Pamela (2012). «Oracle v. Google: Are APIs copyrightable?». Communications of the ACM, 55 (11): 25-27. Disponible en <http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/facpubs/2354>.
Schellingerhout, Ruben y Piero Cavicchi (2010). «Patent ambush in standard-setting: the Commission accepts commitments from Rambus to lower memory chip royalty rates». Competition Policy Newsletter (European Commission), (1): 32-36. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1RPkG9f>.
Sliwa, Carol (1999). «Sun abandons Java standards effort». Computerworld. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1TXBOc5>.
Van Houweling, Molly (2005). «Distributive values in copyright». Texas Law Review, 83 (6): 1535-1579. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/1OsTHM5>.
West, Joel (2003). «How open is open enough? Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies». Research Policy, 32 (7): 1259-1285. Disponible en <http://bit.ly/2025b0l>.
