J.R.McHale

[Text](https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/1890/text) of the Defend Trade Secrets Act (also [pdf](https://www.congress.gov/114/bills/s1890/BILLS-114s1890enr.pdf); 11 pages)

[The New ‘Defend Trade Secrets Act’ Is The Biggest IP Development In Years](http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2016/05/the-new-defend-trade-secrets-act-is-the-biggest-ip-development-in-years-forbes-cross-post.htm) (May 3, 2016) – law professor Eric Goldman at his Technology and Marketing Law Blog

[Five Things to Know About the Defend Trade Secrets Act](http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2016/05/11/five-things-know-defend-trade-secrets-act/id=68954/) (May 11, 2016) – Peter Toren at IPWatchdog

[The Defend Trade Secrets Act and Whistleblowers](https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/davelevine/the-defend-trade-secrets-act-and-whistleblowers/) (April 20, 2016) – Dave Levine at Freedom to Tinker

**Texts (TPP, TISA and TTIP):**

> TPP ([Trans Pacific Partnership](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership)) [full text](https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/trans-pacific-partnership/tpp-full-text)

> TISA ([Trade in Services Agreement](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_in_Services_Agreement)) and TTIP ([Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership](http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ttip/index_en.htm)) texts have not yet been made officially public, although at least portions of certain drafts have been leaked by Wikileaks ([Wikileaks July 2, 2015 press release](https://wikileaks.org/tisa/press.html?2=)).

**Trade Promotion Authority (2015):**

> [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_track_(trade)) on trade fast track

> [On Trade, Here’s What the President Signed into Law](https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/06/29/trade-here-s-what-president-signed-law) – White House blog

> [Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and the Role of Congress in Trade Policy](https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33743.pdf) (pdf; 24 pages) – Congressional Research Service

**Analysis and Opinion:**

> [Privacy Is Not a Barrier to Trade; How a Secretive Trade agreement Could Change the Global Internet](http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2015/06/trade_in_services_agreement_could_change_the_global_internet.html) – law professor Margot Kaminski at Slate

> [TISA: Yet Another Leaked Treaty You’ve Never Heard Of Makes Secret Rules for the Internet](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/05/tisa-yet-another-leaked-treaty-youve-never-heard-makes-secret-rules-internet) – EFF

> [A Congressional Straightjacket: Fast-Tracking the TPP](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michele-goodwin/a-congressional-straightj_b_7659646.html) – law professors Gregory Shaffer and Jack Lerner at The Huffington Post

> [Another Leaked Trade Agreement, Another Reason to Oppose Fast Track](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-singh-grewal/tisa-leak_b_7514314.html) – law professor David Singh Grewal at The Huffington Post

> [TISA: analysis of the leaked ‘core text’](https://www.wikileaks.org/tisa/core/analysis/Analysis-TiSA-Core-Text.pdf) (pdf; 7 pages) – law professor Jane Kelsey

> [Leaked: What’s in Obama’s Trade Deal](http://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2015/06/tpp-deal-leaked-pharma-000126) – Politico

**Update:** [Supreme Court Declines to Hear Appeal in Google-Oracle Copyright Fight](http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/06/29/supreme-court-declines-to-hear-appeal-in-google-oracle-copyright-fight/?_r=5) – New York Times:

> “Monday’s Supreme Court decision, which was specific to this appeal, means the Oracle-Google saga will now move back to the lower courts to determine another aspect of the case: Even though Google was using copyrighted software, was it only making ‘fair use’ of it . . . ‘You shouldn’t let the owner of an A.P.I. end up owning the other person’s program,’ said Michael Barclay, special counsel to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a tech nonprofit devoted to civil liberties. ‘I don’t think we’ll find out how bad a day this is for a long time.'”

**Previously – Solicitor General Brief Argued APIs are Copyrightable:**

Considering whether to grant certiorari in the Google v. Oracle America case, the Supreme Court earlier in 2015 asked the government to weigh in on the dispute. In response, the Solicitor General filed its brief, surprisingly taking the position that APIs **are** subject to copyright protection.

The Solicitor General’s Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae ([pdf](https://www.eff.org/files/2015/06/05/14-410_google_v_oracle_us_cvsg_brief.pdf); 23 pages)

> **News Reaction to Solicitor General Brief**:

> [Let Oracle Own APIs, Justice Department Tells Top Court in Surprise Filing](http://fortune.com/2015/05/26/google-oracle-api-supremecourt-obama-appeal/) – Fortune

> [White House Sides with Oracle, tells Supreme Court APIs are Copyrightable;
Unlicensed Use of APIs Might be a Fair Use, US says](http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/05/white-house-sides-with-oracle-tells-supreme-court-apis-are-copyrightable/) – ArsTechnica

> [Marc Andreesen](https://twitter.com/pmarca) tweet: “Obama Administration to software programmers: Drop dead!”

> [The Solicitor General’s Peculiar Brief in Google v. Oracle](http://www.project-disco.org/intellectual-property/060115-the-solicitor-generals-peculiar-brief-in-google-v-oracle/) – Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), Disruptive Competition Project

> [Google Versus Oracle Case Exposes Differences within Obama Administration](http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/15/us-google-oracle-lawsuit-insight-idUSKBN0O017Z20150515) – Reuters

> [How Oracle Versus Google Could Ruin Software Development](http://www.lifehacker.com.au/2015/06/how-oracle-versus-google-could-ruin-software-development/) – Lifehacker

**Background:**

> [Oracle America v. Google – Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_America,_Inc._v._Google,_Inc.)

> [List and Links to Rulings and Related Filings](https://www.eff.org/cases/oracle-v-google) (under the Tab “Documents” following the brief article) – EFF

> See, in particular, the November 2014 “Brief of Amici Curiae Computer Scientists in Support of Petitioner” ([pdf](https://www.eff.org/files/2014/11/07/google_v_oracle_computer-scientists-certpetition-amicus-brief_14-410_final.pdf); 27 pages, excluding list of amici and tables of content and cited authorities)

**Appeals Court Ruling (May 2014)** – Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

> The Appeals Court [Decision](https://scholar.google.ca/scholar_case?q=google+oracle+may+9,+2014&hl=en&as_sdt=2003&case=15197092051369647665&scilh=0)

> Reaction (at that time): [Tech World Stunned as Court Rules Oracle Can Own APIs; Google Loses Copyright Appeal](https://gigaom.com/2014/05/09/tech-world-stunned-as-court-rules-oracle-can-own-apis-google-loses-copyright-appeal/) – GigaOm

**Original Trial and Decision (May 2012)** – U.S. District Court, Northern District of California

> The Original Copyright Related Rulings: “Order re: copyright ability of certain replicated elements of the JAVA application programming interface” [(pdf](http://www.groklaw.net/pdf3/OraGoogle-1202.pdf); 41 pages) and “Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on Equitable Defenses” [(pdf](http://www.groklaw.net/pdf3/OraGoogle-1203.pdf); 3 pages)

> News Article Summing Up the Patent Portion of the Case: [Jury Clears Google of Infringing on Oracle Patents](http://www.zdnet.com/article/jury-clears-google-of-infringing-on-oracle-patents/) – ZDNet

> Reaction (at that time): [Google Wins Crucial API Ruling, Oracle’s Case Decimated; Java API Packages ‘free for all to use under the Copyright Act’](http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/05/google-wins-crucial-api-ruling-oracles-case-decimated/) – ArsTechnica

Nice to see the open source (and free or low cost) casebook movement continue to gather steam. Even better that we are starting to see epub/mobi editions; pdf’s often present poorly on mobile devices:

> Professor Eric Goldman’s [2014 Internet Law casebook and syllabus](http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2014/08/2014-internet-law-casebook-and-syllabus-now-available.htm) (pdf – $8, hard copy and kindle editions).

> Professors Rebecca Tushnet and Eric Goldman’s [2014 Advertising & Marketing Law casebook](http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2014/08/announcing-the-second-edition-of-advertising-marketing-law-cases-and-materials-by-tushnet-goldman.htm) (pdf and epub editions – $11.50).

> Professor James Boyle (Duke law school) and Jennifer Jenkins’ (Director of Duke’s Center for the Study of the Public Domain) [Intellectual Property: Law & the Information Society; cases & materials (open casebook – 2014 edition)](http://www.thepublicdomain.org/2014/08/26/open-coursebook-in-intellectual-property/#more-1728) (pdf edition – free; paperback – $29.99).

> Professor Barton Beebe’s [Trademark Law: An Open Source Casebook](http://us.creativecommons.org/archives/942) (2014) [(pdf and .doc versions – free)](http://tmcasebook.org/).

> Professor James Grimmelmann’s [Internet Law: Cases and Problems 4.0](http://internetcasebook.com/) (pdf – $30 suggested price).

> The United States Copyright Office has released a public draft of its “[Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices, Third Edition](http://copyright.gov/comp3/)” (1,222 page [pdf](http://copyright.gov/comp3/docs/compendium-full.pdf) – free). Pending final review, the compendium (the first since 1984’s Second Edition) will take formal effect on or around December 15, 2014.

Opinion of U.S. District Court Judge Denny Chin ruling in favor of Google over the Authors’ Guild in the long-running Google Books dispute: [**pdf**](http://publicknowledge.org/files/google%20summary%20judgment%20final.pdf)

[**”Google Books ruled legal in massive win for fair use; Scans that show snippets are legal—they don’t replace the full book.”**](http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/11/google-books-ruled-legal-in-massive-win-for-fair-use/) ARS Technica.

[**”Why Google’s Fair Use Victory In Google Books Suit Is A Big Deal–And Why It Isn’t.”**](http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericgoldman/2013/11/14/why-googles-fair-use-victory-in-google-books-suit-is-a-big-deal-and-why-it-isnt/) Professor Eric Goldman in Forbes.

[**15 Years Ago, Congress Kept Mickey Mouse Out of the Public Domain. Will They Do It Again?**](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/10/25/15-years-ago-congress-kept-mickey-mouse-out-of-the-public-domain-will-they-do-it-again/) At the **Washington Post**, **Timothy B. Lee** recounts the history of copyright term extensions.