Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/18-956_d18f.pdf
Page Number: 53

10 

GOOGLE LLC v. ORACLE AMERICA, INC. 

THOMAS, J., dissenting 

Congress,  however,  rejected  this  sort  of  categorical  dis-
tinction that would make declaring code less worthy of pro-
tection.  The Copyright Act protects code that operates “in
a  computer  in  order  to  bring  about  a  certain  result”  both
“directly”  (implementing  code)  and  “indirectly”  (declaring 
code).  §101.  And if anything, declaring code is closer to the 
“core of copyright.”  Ante, at 24.  Developers cannot even see
implementing  code.    Oracle  Am.,  Inc. v.  Google  Inc.,  2016 
WL 3181206, *4 (ND Cal., June 8, 2016); see also ante, at 
23 (declaring code is “user-centered”).  Implementing code
thus conveys no expression to developers.  Declaring code, 
in contrast, is user facing.  It must be designed and orga-
nized in a way that is intuitive and understandable to de-
velopers so that they can invoke it. 

Even setting those concerns aside, the majority’s distinc-
tion is untenable.  True, declaring code is “inherently bound 
together  with  uncopyrightable  ideas.”    Ante,  at  23–24.  Is 
anything  not?    Books  are  inherently  bound  with  uncopy-
rightable  ideas—the  use  of  chapters,  having  a  plot,  or  in-
cluding dialogue or footnotes.  This does not place books far 
“from the core of copyright.”  And implementing code, which
the majority concedes is copyrightable, is inherently bound 
up  with  “the  division  of  computing  tasks”  that  cannot  be 
copyrighted.6  Ante, at 22.  We have not discounted a work 
of authorship simply because it is associated with noncopy-
rightable ideas.  While ideas cannot be copyrighted, expres-
sions of those ideas can.  Golan, 565 U. S., at 328. 

Similarly, it makes no difference that the value of declar-
ing code depends on how much time third parties invest in 

—————— 

6 The majority also belittles declaring code by suggesting it is simply a
way to organize implementing code.  Ante, at 22–23.  Not so.  Declaring 
code defines subprograms of implementing code, including by controlling 
what inputs they can process.  Similarly, the majority is wrong to suggest 
that the purpose of declaring code is to connect pre-existing method calls 
to  implementing  code.    Ante,  at  5.  Declaring  code  creates  the  method 
calls.