In my long, admittedly meandering post of April 18, I asserted that although a traditional understanding of fair use often concerns itself with purpose as perceived through message, the Second Circuit in AWF v. Goldsmith was right to adopt a “message-blind” approach in its opinion reversing the lower court’s finding. I say this despite my personal view that the Warhol ...

  The Committee for Justice held this panel discussion about the decision in Google v. Oracle. Featuring Adam Mossoff Professor of Law at Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University Zvi Rosen Assistant Professor at the Southern Illinois University School of Law, Steven Tepp President & CEO of Sentinel Worldwide, and moderated by Curt Levey, President of the Committee for ...

Once the die was cast (i.e. after oral arguments) in Google v. Oracle, I don’t think I was alone in feeling that if the Supreme Court held that the computer code at issue in this case was not properly a subject of copyright protection, that would be an acceptably narrow decision, even though many might disagree with it as a ...

I realize the Court will rule anytime now, and that I may be gilding the proverbial lily here; but I drafted this post in early January, and then the world got a little crazy and distracting. Anyway, FWIW, below is my last observation about Google v. Oracle. At least until after the decision. 🙂 In Google v. Oracle, the Supreme ...

As mentioned in my last Google v. Oracle post, the Supreme Court devoted considerable attention during oral argument to addressing the standard applied by the Federal Circuit when it determined as a matter of law that Google’s copying of Oracle’s code was not fair use. Google maintains that the Federal Circuit failed to show proper deference to a jury decision, ...

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)