The Google v. Oracle America case was referred to as "the copyright case of the decade". Moreover, with the Supreme Court's ruling of 6-to-2, Google was spared from all claims. Oracle had claimed that Google used Java, a programming language owned by Oracle, incorrectly in its Android operating system. Oracle's claims were based on their understanding that Google used components of Java without the proper permissions of copyright infringement. However, Google managed to justify their actions since they had not violated the established copyright laws, and had made "fair use" of the code. Nonetheless, in order to continue making technological advancements, the new work or discoveries needs help from the previous one. Hence, it would be a waste of knowledge to disregard existing material, simply because of our the ego that our contemporary culture has established correct.
A similar situation occurs when architects copy previous architectural projects. In the past, architecture could be copied without problem, however in the present the copy paste culture has received a negative connotation. Hence, in order to copy, and architect must manage and understand the work will copy, in order make a "fair use" of the material. Moreover, incredible and innovative architecture can be the result of previous works, just like it happened with Google.
Referencia:
"Supreme Court Backs Google In Copyright Fight With Oracle". Nytimes.Com, 2021, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/05/us/google-oracle-supreme-court.html.
Comentários