Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/18-956_d18f.pdf
Page Number: 54

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

11 

THOMAS, J., dissenting 

learning it.  Many other copyrighted works depend on the 
same.  A Broadway musical script needs actors and singers
to  invest  time  learning  and  rehearsing  it.    But  a  theater 
cannot  copy  a  script—the  rights  to  which  are  held  by  a
smaller theater—simply because it wants to entice actors to
switch theaters and because copying the script is more effi-
cient than requiring the actors to learn a new one.

What the majority says is true of declaring code is no less 
true of implementing code.  Declaring code is how program-
mers  access  prewritten  implementing  code.    The  value  of 
that implementing code thus is directly proportional to how 
much  programmers  value  the  associated  declaring  code. 
The majority correctly recognizes that declaring code “is in-
extricably bound up with implementing code,” ante, at 22– 
23, but it overlooks the implications of its own conclusion.

Only after wrongly concluding that the nature of declar-
ing code makes that code generally unworthy of protection 
does the Court move on to consider the other factors.  This 
opening mistake taints the Court’s entire analysis. 

B.  Market Effects 
“[U]ndoubtedly the single most important element of fair
use”  is  the  effect  of  Google’s  copying  “ ‘upon  the  potential
market for or value of [Oracle’s] copyrighted work.’ ”  Har-
per & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises, 471 U. S. 
539,  566  (1985).    As  the  Federal  Circuit  correctly  deter-
mined,  “evidence  of  actual  and  potential  harm  stemming 
from Google’s copying was ‘overwhelming.’ ”  886 F. 3d 1179, 
1209  (2018).  By  copying  Oracle’s  code  to  develop  and  re-
lease Android, Google ruined Oracle’s potential market in 
at least two ways.

First, Google eliminated the reason manufacturers were 
willing to pay to install the Java platform.  Google’s busi-
ness model differed from Oracle’s.  While Oracle earned rev-
enue by charging device manufacturers to install the Java
platform,  Google  obtained  revenue  primarily  through  ad