Google v. Oracle: Should SCOTUS Declare Code is an Expression or an Idea?

Stefan Szpajda

Stefan Szpajda

Stefan is an attorney in the firm’s Trial Group, focusing on intellectual property litigation. He has significant experience in counseling clients in disputes over license agreements, software development agreements, patents, and trade secrets. Stefan is also committed to pro bono work, and has represented pro bono clients through trial in federal court, administrative hearings, and on appeal before the Ninth Circuit.

Connor Hansen

Connor Hansen

Connor’s practice focuses on patent and trademark litigation and related actions involving intellectual property rights. He has represented clients in federal district court, the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB), and the International Trade Commission (ITC). Connor also has a passion for pro bono work and has represented clients at the Social Security Administration and the Board of Veterans Appeals.

You may also like...

2 Responses

  1. avatar El roam says:

    Excellent post. What may be missing here, is the significance of the argument of Oracle, that Google could develop by itself such declaring code. This touches also , issues concerning public policy ( as mentioned in the post). Could Google argue, that in light of very intensive integration needed in the digital era, such development of independent and individual declaring code, would affect the ability of Google, to integrate, other software or applications or even addons in the operating system ? This is because, Java indeed, is the only code reigning all over the industry it seems. Can it be so, that without which , Google, wouldn’t be able to reach reasonable performance or effective technological capacity, with their OP ?

    Finally, it may touch also, the issue of ” fair use ” ahead.

    Thanks

  2. avatar El roam says:

    Just correcting my comment above:

    Should be ” OS ” of course, over what is written: ” OP ” .

    Thanks

Leave a Reply