SAN FRANCISCO (CN) - Facing claims that Google's Android system infringes on Oracle's copyrighted Java interfaces, and with no settlement in sight, the technology giants filed pretrial briefs with Google characterizing the interfaces as unprotected systems of operation.
Application programming interfaces (APIs) are "original works of authorship" that are "protected as literary works," according to Oracle. But Google says they are "part of a medium for expression, not the expression itself" and as such are an "uncopyrightable system or method of operation."
Software components use APIs - source-code based specifications - to communicate with each other.
Oracle argues that Google infringed on the specifications for 37 Java APIs, which are protected as literary works. It makes the same claim about the class libraries, which are source- or object-code implementations of the specifications. It claims the combination of API elements are protectable even if they would not be, individually.
"In Satava v Lowry, for example, the Ninth Circuit found the individual elements of the plaintiff's jellyfish sculpture were unprotectable scenes a faire, but nonetheless went on to assess whether the combination was copyrightable," Oracle says.
The court said: "a combination of unprotectable elements is eligible for copyright protection only if those elements are numerous enough and their selection and arrangement original enough that their combination constitutes an original work of authorship."
Oracle's brief states that "a unique and detailed structure, like that of the 37 APIs, qualifies as expression." These items are protected even though the underlying ideas are not, Oracle claims.
"While it sometimes can be difficult to separate idea from expression, that is not the case here, where Google copied 11,000 pages of API specifications," the brief states. "No case has held that a structure this detailed and complex is an 'idea' rather than the expression of an idea."
The "APIs are replete with design choices, large and small, that reflect the expressiveness of their designers," Oracle added.
Google allegedly needed a license for the APIs, but it never got one. Programmers often write only a part of a program and then call on class libraries described by Oracle's APIs to provide the remainder. An application written this way will not contain all the code needed to carry out the functions. Only someone who also has a copy of the class libraries can run the application.
"Thus, while an application programmer does not need a license to the APIs from Oracle to author and distribute a program in the Java programming language (even if it includes calls to the APIs), whoever runs a program that includes API calls will need a license from Oracle, because that person needs an executable implementation of the APIs," according to its brief (parentheses in original).
Google, on the other hand, claims that the "selection, arrangement and structure of the 37 APIs are not copyrightable," as they are part of a medium for expression, not the expression itself. As such, Google says they are a uncopyrightable system or method of operation.