Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/18-956_d18f.pdf
Page Number: 52

Cite as:  593 U. S. ____ (2021) 

9 

THOMAS, J., dissenting 

evaluates the factors neither in sequential order nor in or-
der of importance (at least two factors are more important
under  our  precedent5).    Instead,  it  starts  with  the  second 
factor: the nature of the copyrighted work.  It proceeds in
this manner in order to create a distinction between declar-
ing  and  implementing  code  that  renders  the  former  less 
worthy of protection than the latter.  Because the majority’s 
mistaken  analysis  rests  so  heavily  on  this  factor,  I  begin
with it as well. 

A.  The Nature of the Copyrighted Work 
This factor requires courts to assess the level of creativity
or functionality in the original work.  It generally favors fair
use  when  a  copyrighted  work  is  more  “informational  or 
functional”  than  “creative.”  4  M.  Nimmer  &  D.  Nimmer, 
Copyright §13.05[A][2][a] (2019).  Because code is predomi-
nantly functional, this factor will often favor copying when
the original work is computer code.  But because Congress 
determined that declaring and implementing code are cop-
yrightable, this factor alone cannot support a finding of fair 
use. 

The  majority,  however,  uses  this  factor  to  create  a  dis-
tinction between declaring and implementing code that in
effect removes copyright protection from declaring code.  It 
concludes that, unlike implementing code, declaring code is
far “from the core of copyright” because it becomes valuable 
only  when  third  parties  (computer  programmers)  value  it
and because it is “inherently bound together with uncopy-
rightable ideas.”  Ante, at 23–24. 
—————— 

5 The fourth factor—the effect of Google’s copying on the potential mar-
ket  for  Oracle’s  work—is  “undoubtedly  the  single  most  important  ele-
ment of fair use.”  Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises, 
471 U. S. 539, 566 (1985).  The first factor—the purpose and character of 
the  use,  including  whether  the  use  is  commercial—is  the  second-most 
important because it can prove dispositive.  See id., at 550 (“[In general,] 
the fair use doctrine has always precluded a use that ‘supersede[s] the 
use of the original’ ”).