Compatibility is About Competition, Too

[Commentary] The Oracle v. Google case is not just about innovation, but about competition. The case itself is mostly about whether copyright prevents a software developer (or more broadly, any author or inventor) from creating a new product that is in some ways compatible with an older one. Public Knowledge and many others have argued that it does not -- copyright cannot be used to protect functional articles like the names of API calls and other things that are necessary for a new product to implement to ensure compatibility.

Oracle is asking the Supreme Court for the right to be the only one who can use an API. But if things like the structure of an API were copyrightable, competition would suffer. Introducing more choice into a market, driving down prices, or making a product available on more generous license terms might not be as exciting as the new new thing. But just as copyright should not be used to stifle innovation, it should not be used to stifle competition. Markets depend on competitors to function, and Oracle's view of copyright, if upheld, could replace markets with monopoly.