unitedstatessupremecourt

Latest

  • What you need to know about Google's battle with Oracle over Android

    by 
    Ben Gilbert
    Ben Gilbert
    10.14.2014

    Two of the world's most powerful companies are engaged in a legal battle that has its roots in the world's most popular mobile operating system: Android. Google is playing defendant, while Oracle is laying claim to a crucial set of code in the foundation of Android. Doesn't ring any bells? That's likely due to the fact that this dispute goes back four years. Just this week, Google filed a petition with the United States Supreme Court to decide once and for all which company is in the right. So, what are these two internet giants fighting about? The short answer is Java, which Oracle owns. The real answer, of course, is far more complex

  • Google wants to bring its Android copyright battle to the US Supreme Court

    by 
    Ben Gilbert
    Ben Gilbert
    10.09.2014

    Google and Oracle are still arguing over code at the foundation of Google's mobile operating system, Android. Google this week filed a petition with the United States Supreme Court, which appealed a lower court's ruling that Oracle can legally copyright foundational code. The decisions have gone back and forth over the course of the last four years: First a judge in California ruled in favor of Google; then an appeals court ruled in favor of Oracle; and now Google's pushing for the Supreme Court to get involved. But what are the two internet giants even arguing about? At the heart of Android are a set of Java APIs that Oracle is claiming aren't available for commercial use without a licensing fee (approximately $1 billion). Google argues that the API code is functional -- not a "creative work" -- and therefore isn't copyrightable. The case is, of course, far more complex than our explanation, but that's the big picture (our own Chris Velazco goes into far more background detail right here).

  • US Supreme Court rules Aereo's streaming service is illegal under copyright law

    by 
    Ben Gilbert
    Ben Gilbert
    06.25.2014

    In a precedent-setting decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled today that Aereo is in violation of US copyright law. The decision states that Aereo's use of tiny antennas hooked up to cloud DVR technology violates the right of companies producing broadcast content. Specifically, the decision says that Aereo's business violates the 1976 Copyright Act; the act states that individuals or businesses are violating copyright if: 1: perform or display it at a place open to the public or at any place where a substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of a family and its social acquaintances is gathered; or 2: to transmit or otherwise communicate a performance or display of the work ... to the public by means of any device or process, whether the members of the public are capable of receiving the performance or display receive it in the same place or in separate places at the same time or at different times In the case of Aereo, the Supreme Court says the company's service is tantamount to "a performance or display of the work." Update (6/28): As of 11:30AM ET today, Aereo has "paused" its service, and is refunding subscribers for their last paid month.

  • What you need to know to keep the Feds out of your phone

    by 
    Ben Gilbert
    Ben Gilbert
    04.29.2014

    If you're arrested for overdue speeding tickets, is it acceptable for the police to search the phone on your person? How about if you're arrested for drug trafficking? In the eyes of the law, there is no difference: If you're arrested, you're arrested, whatever the crime. Isn't that an invasion of privacy? That depends on your interpretation of the US Constitution's Fourth Amendment, which states: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." That's why two cases being heard at the United States Supreme Court today are of such importance. Both cases hinge on whether police are legally allowed to search the contents of mobile phones confiscated from arrestees without first obtaining a warrant, and the decisions leveled by the Supreme Court will impact every citizen in the United States.