We think, of course, that Google has nailed the coffin shut on the Oracle copyright infringment claim with respect to its API:
“Computer programming languages are not copyrightable, and neither are Oracle’s APIs. Oracle accuses Google of infringement for doing what the Oracle API specifications describe. That is a classic attempt to improperly assert copyright over an idea rather than expression. The Court should hold that the structure, selection and organization of the APIs are uncopyrightable.”
In any event, for all clients and curious public readers, Judge Alsup does a wonderful job in these jury instructions in framing the issues.
Jury Procedure
Share on Facebook
As the Authors Guild pursues here in New York its injunctive relief copyright case against the Hathitrust Orphan Works project, it sues, among others, Hathitrust, The Regents Of The University Of Michigan, The Regents of the University of California, The Board Of Regents Of The University Of Wisconsin System, The Trustees Of Indiana University, and Cornell Universit.
We turn our attention to the eloquent letter of Kevin Smith, Duke’s Scholarly Communication Officer to plaintiff author J.R. Salamanca, whose 1958 out of print novel appears to be on the verge of extinction. Mr. Smith writes:
“I am sure I do not have to tell you that libraries, including those that intend to participate in the Hathi Orphan Works project, are not your enemies. We are in the business of helping authors find readers, which hardly seems like it should be an objectionable activity. So let’s think for a minute about The Lost Country and what might be best for it and for you.”
Our friends at TechDirt are less diplomatic: Novelist Joins Lawsuit Against Libraries; Would Apparently Prefer His Book Rot In Obscurity.
Share on Facebook
Bloomberg News, April 16, 2012: “The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to consider whether discount retailers violate copyright laws by selling tens of billions of dollars in “gray market” products after buying them overseas at a reduced price.”
Massive opposition to the Wiley case has been filed by the major United States discount superstores, including Walmart, Costco, Target and Ebay.
The doctrine of “First Sale” restricts the copyright owner’s ability to block the resale of its copyrighted property. As I previously wrote here, the Second Circuit inexplicably carved out an exception for copyrighted goods manufactured overseas.
A very strange ruling, since is not the property being “protected” the intellectual work and not the physical object?
Share on Facebook
At the intersection of 1709Blog and TorrentFreak, a copyright Trollee asks a San Francisco court to deny copyright protection to adult content.
Not as good as Super Bowl 46 (no Roman numerals for me), but when EFF send their A team (IP Litigator Steven Yuen) to fight trolls, anything can happen.
So, if we deny copyright protection to “pornography”, then we put the courts into the posture of passing on the merits of copyright protection for a much broader category of intellectual work. Is this really the mission of my friends and colleagues at the Electronic Frontier Foundation?
Share on Facebook
