Oracle vs. Google (2014): Concluding Remarks
by Legal PDF: Tech Court CasesOctober 11th, 2023
Too Long; Didn't Read
Oracle vs. Google (2014) Court Filing, retrieved on May 9, 2014, is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series.People Mentioned
Oracle vs. Google (2014) Court Filing, retrieved on May 9, 2014, is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part in this filing here. This is part 16 of 16.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the declaring code and the structure, sequence, and organization of the 37 Java API packages at issue are entitled to copyright protection. We therefore reverse the district court’s copyrightability determination with instructions to reinstate the jury’s infringement verdict. Because the jury hung on fair use, we remand Google’s fair use defense for further proceedings consistent with this decision.
With respect to Google’s cross-appeal, we affirm the district court’s decisions: (1) granting Oracle’s motion for JMOL as to the eight decompiled Java files that Google copied into Android; and (2) denying Google’s motion for JMOL with respect to the rangeCheck function. Accordingly, we affirm-in-part, reverse-in-part, and remand for further proceedings.
AFFIRMED-IN-PART, REVERSED-IN-PART, AND REMANDED
About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings.
This court case 10-CV-3561 retrieved on September 22, 2023, from law.justia.com is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction.
L O A D I N G
. . . comments & more!
. . . comments & more!
