October Term 2020 · Docket 18-956

Can a company copyright the structure of a programming language?

Google copied Java code to build Android. Oracle claims this violates copyright law. Google argues the code is functional and fair use applies.

Official caption
Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc.
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Decided
Sources analyzed through
Post Opinion

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  3. — An official Court opinion was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Thomas Goldstein argued for Google. He stated the merger doctrine resolved the copyrightability question. He claimed Oracle holds a copyright to Java code but not a patent. He argued the public owns the right to Java's function. He said Oracle cannot use copyright to create patent-like rights.

    David Stewart argued for Oracle. He cited a 1978 national commission report. He noted the report recommended copyright protection for computer code. He argued Congress defined literary works to include software. He stated copyright protection applies as long as code is original.

    Chief Justice Roberts questioned the merger doctrine. He compared copying a brief's structure to copying its text. He asked if copying headings and organization is acceptable. He suggested that copying the only way to express an idea is copyright infringement.

    Justice Thomas questioned the timing of the merger doctrine. He asked when the court should determine if merger applies. He suggested looking at Section 101 of the copyright statute. He compared the situation to a football team copying a playbook.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests whether copyright law protects the structure of a computer program. It also tests whether copying that structure counts as fair use.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 7, 2020.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Google wants the court to rule that copying Java's structure is fair use.

Oracle wants the court to rule that Google infringed its copyright.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Google argues the merger doctrine bars copyright protection for functional code.

Oracle argues Congress granted copyright protection to original software code.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Thomas asked if copying a playbook is acceptable if it is the only way to play.

Chief Justice Roberts asked if copying a brief's structure is acceptable if the text differs.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This dispute defines the scope of copyright protection for software. It determines whether developers can copy code structures to build new systems. The outcome shapes the future of software interoperability and innovation.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Verified official opinions and orders

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Post Opinion ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Post Opinion ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON