Among the many issues surrounding property rights that were discussed in today’s class is the issue of copyrights and patents
Among the many issues surrounding property rights that were discussed in today’s class is the issue of copyrights and patents. Some people will hear that “Patents and copyrights give businesses the incentive to innovate”, think this sounds about right, that someone who invented a better mousetrap should not see his invention stolen, and not trouble themselves to think beyond that. Case closed. But even a tiny little bit of willingness to think critically would reveal that the issue is incredibly more complex.
For example, a few years ago, Apple sued Samsung because Samsung had implemented a \”Swipe right\” command to bring up a menu on their phones. Was Apple seeking a just reward for having made the discovery that this would be a convenient interface? or was Apple trying to make sure that Samsung\’s phones would be less user friendly?
Some years earlier, when iTunes hit the market and seemed like a promising business model, some guy sued Apple, claiming that he had a patent on any \”process to choose a song from a menu\”. Was he seeking a just reward for having discovered that customers might want to choose from a menu? or was it a parasitical attempt at extracting a ransom from Apple?
In the fall of 2020, a very important copyright case was heard in the supreme court, which could have massive repercussions for the tech industry for years to come. You can read a summary of the argument here:
For some background, an API (Application Programming Interface) is coding that translates the commands issued by an app into something the computer in a cell phone can understand. So, developers can write apps using the Java programming language and the Java API built into the Android operating system ensures that these apps will be compatible. Without the Java API, developers would have to learn and recode their apps in a different language. You can imagine how onerous it would be for developers if Google was to remove the Java API from its Android operating system.
By the way, the Java API was developed by Sun Microsystems before Oracle bought Sun. As pointed out by a commenter to the flagged article, Google\’s lawyer asked Jonathan Schwartz (CEO of Sun when Google re-implemented the Java APIs) whether, during his tenure at Sun, Java APIs were considered proprietary or protected by Sun. \”\’No,\’ Schwartz said in explaining the nature of open software. \’These are open APIs, and we wanted to bring in more people…we wanted to build the biggest tent and invite as many people as possible.\’\”Former Sun CEO says Google\’s Android didn\’t need license for Java APIsLinks to an external site.
Please read carefully these articles and comment on the fundamental economic issue: Is this a case where copyrights reward innovation and spur the development of better products, or is this a case where the enforcement of copyrights would expose companies to the risk of interminable and costly lawsuits over every piece of code and hinder to ability to bring new and better products to market?
If you\’re interested, you can read how the Supreme Court eventually ruled on this case here:
Supreme Court rules API copying is fair useLinks to an external site.
Requirements: 450
Answer preview to among the many issues surrounding property rights that were discussed in today’s class is the issue of copyrights and patents
APA
549 words
