BarbriSFCourseDetails
  1. keyboard_arrow_leftBack

Course Details

Course Information
  • smart_display Format

    On-Demand

  • signal_cellular_alt Difficulty Level

  • work Practice Area

    Trademark and Copyright

Date & Time
  • event Date

    Tuesday, June 15, 2021

  • schedule Time

    1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT

  • timer Program Length

    90 minutes

Credit Information

  • This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.

$347.00
CLE
ALL

This CLE course will guide IP counsel the Supreme Court's recent decision in Google v. Oracle. The panel will discuss the decision and the implications for the fair use doctrine and the copyrightability of application programming interfaces (APIs). The panel will also address the potential implications for the software industry and beyond.

Faculty

David H. Herrington
Partner
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP

Mr. Herrington’s practice and experience span a wide range of litigation, advisory and regulatory matters, with a focus on intellectual property disputes. He has handled multiple suits involving claims of patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, trademark infringement and copyright infringement, as well as high stakes suits concerning IP licenses. Mr. Herrington also counsels on IP issues in the transactional context, including licensing, M&A and capital markets transactions, the sale of patent portfolios and other matters. His experience in other areas includes regulatory enforcement actions, internal investigations and commercial litigation. Mr. Herrington has conducted a number of IP suits through trial and appeal. He also has successfully represented clients in international arbitrations, evidentiary hearings and appeals.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio
Paul H. Arne
Partner
Morris Manning & Martin LLP

Mr. Arne is the co-chair of his firm's Technology Transactions Practice and the Privacy and Security Practice. He represents technology companies and large end users, with a particular emphasis on complex, outsourcing matters, international transactions, open source software, privacy, university technology transfer, and revenue recognition issues. He is also involved with development, manufacturing, and distribution involving medical devices. He has written numerous technology law articles in legal publications and a frequent speaker on the law affecting technology companies.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio

Description

On Apr. 5, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its much-awaited decision in Google v. Oracle America, finding Google's use of software code was fair use under the copyright law. The decision reversed the Federal Circuit and reinstated the jury's finding that Google was not liable to Oracle when it copied and used specific portions of Java, a programming environment owned by Oracle. The decision guides counsel on the boundaries of copyright law as it relates to software.

The implications of the Court's decision are not limited to the software industry. Developers may be able to use APIs developed by others in the developer's own code. The decision has the potential to broaden the doctrine of fair use significantly.

Listen as our authoritative panel of IP attorneys examines the Supreme Court's decision in Google v. Oracle. The panel will discuss the decision and the implications for the fair use doctrine. The panel will also address the potential implications for the software industry and beyond.

Outline

  1. Google v. Oracle: background and ruling
  2. Implications of the decision
    1. Did the Court change the fair use defense?
    2. What happened to the idea/expression dichotomy? Does it matter?
    3. What can be copied and when? What cannot be copied?
      1. Implications for businesses
      2. Licensing APIs
      3. Implications for open source software
    4. Enforcement of IP rights
  3. Best practices

Benefits

The panel will review these and other key questions:

  • How may the Google v. Oracle decision change copyrightability of open source software?
  • What strategies should companies and developers employ when developing APIs?
  • What are the best practices for licensees to ensure compliance with open source license agreements?
  • What is the takeaway from the Court's not addressing the question presenting on the copyrightability of APIs?