Startups would suffer from copyright protections for API declarations
TLDR: Later this year, the Supreme Court will weigh in on a long-standing copyright dispute between Oracle and Google over the permissible use of application programming interfaces, or APIs. APIs are software interfaces that startups rely on to promote interoperability and reduce costs. If they were eligible for copyright protection, then companies that own the API copyrights would be able to prevent others from using those APIs without paying for a license. This week Engine filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court, arguing that APIs should not be eligible for copyright protection, and in particular that extending copyright protections to APIs is an attempt to evade patent law in a way that would unduly harm startups and entrepreneurs.
What’s Happening This Week: Engine submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday arguing that Oracle’s lawsuit against Google is framed as a copyright case, but that “under the surface, this lawsuit represents an end-run around the carefully constructed requirements and limitations of patent law.”
The case in question, Oracle v. Google, began almost a decade ago when Oracle first sued Google for copyright infringement over the use of APIs. A California district court twice ruled in Google’s favor—including holding that APIs are not eligible for copyright protections—before a D.C. appeals court overturned both decisions. The Supreme Court last year announced that it would take up the case, which is expected to be heard later this summer.
Why it Matters to Startups: A ruling in Oracle’s favor could allow companies to copyright APIs and other software interfaces that promote interoperability. Startups, particularly fledgling ventures, rely on APIs to reduce costs and ensure that their products are easily accessible across a variety of computer programs.
As we previously noted, a ruling in favor of copyright protections for APIs could have a chilling effect on tech innovation by requiring startups and developers to obtain licenses to all the various software interfaces they might conceivably need. Companies that do not do so could face the possibility of potentially ruinous litigation over any projects that involve the use of APIs.
As we highlight in our amicus brief, however, this case also “represents an end-run around the carefully constructed requirements and limitations of patent law.” Oracle is attempting to use copyright law to obtain a monopoly on APIs, despite the fact that the “protection of ideas, systems, and methods is and has always been the domain of patents.” Since interoperability is not feasible without API declarations, creating different declarations is not a viable solution. A ruling in favor of Oracle’s copyright claim would allow the company to obtain patent-like protections over the functionality of API declarations, giving the company “broad, long-lasting rights of unspecified scope, with no requirement that their creation is new and no examination by anyone.”
The Supreme Court’s decision in this case will be critically important for startups, helping to clarify what is and is not protected by copyright protections and resolving questions about the permissible use of APIs. We hope that the Court will see that this case is about technology that should have been protected (if at all) through patent law, and not copyright law, and will rule that API declarations are uncopyrightable.
On the Horizon.
President Donald Trump is expected to sign the phase one trade deal with China tomorrow. The deal would require China to stop the practice of forced technology transfers and address intellectual property concerns.
The House Judiciary Committee’s antitrust panel is planning to hold a field hearing in Colorado at 10 a.m. this Friday as part of its continuing investigation into online platforms and competition. The panel’s fifth hearing will focus on “competitors in the digital economy.”
