Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/18-956_d18f.pdf
Page Number: 1.0

(Slip Opinion) 

OCTOBER  TERM,  2020 

1 

Syllabus 

NOTE:  Where  it  is  feasible,  a  syllabus  (headnote)  will  be  released,  as  is 
being  done  in  connection  with  this  case,  at  the  time  the  opinion  is  issued. 
The  syllabus  constitutes  no  part  of  the  opinion  of  the  Court  but  has  been 
prepared  by  the  Reporter  of  Decisions  for  the  convenience  of  the  reader. 
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

Syllabus 

GOOGLE LLC v. ORACLE AMERICA, INC. 

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR 
THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT 

No. 18–956.  Argued October 7, 2020—Decided  April 5, 2021 

Oracle America, Inc., owns a copyright in Java SE, a computer platform
that uses the popular Java computer programming language.  In 2005, 
Google acquired Android and sought to build a new software platform
for mobile devices.  To allow the millions of programmers familiar with
the  Java  programming  language  to  work with  its  new  Android  plat-
form, Google copied roughly 11,500 lines of code from the Java SE pro-
gram.  The  copied  lines  are  part  of  a  tool  called  an  Application  Pro-
gramming Interface (API).  An API allows programmers to call upon 
prewritten computing tasks for use in their own programs.  Over the 
course  of  protracted  litigation,  the  lower  courts  have  considered  (1) 
whether  Java  SE’s  owner  could  copyright  the  copied  lines  from  the 
API, and (2) if so, whether Google’s copying constituted a permissible
“fair use” of that material freeing Google from copyright liability.  In 
the proceedings below, the Federal Circuit held that the copied lines
are copyrightable.  After a jury then found for Google on fair use, the 
Federal Circuit reversed, concluding that Google’s copying was not a 
fair use as a matter of law.  Prior to remand for a trial on damages, the
Court agreed to review the Federal Circuit’s determinations as to both 
copyrightability and fair use.  

Held: Google’s  copying  of  the  Java  SE  API,  which  included  only  those 
lines of code that were needed to allow programmers to put their ac-
crued talents to work in a new and transformative program, was a fair
use of that material as a matter of law.  Pp. 11–36. 

(a) Copyright and patents, the Constitution says, serve to “promote
the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times
to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writ-
ings and Discoveries.”  Art. I, §8, cl. 8.  Copyright encourages the pro-
duction of works that others might cheaply reproduce by granting the