The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has submitted an amicus brief to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, challenging a concerning precedent established in Oracle v. Rimini. In Oracle v. Rimini, a federal district court deemed Rimini's software a "derivative work" due to its compatibility with Oracle's software, despite not incorporating any copyrightable code from Oracle. Traditionally, a work is classified as derivative only if it closely resembles a preexisting work in ideas and expression. EFF argues that this broad interpretation poses a risk to adversarial interoperability and sets a problematic precedent.

EFF, alongside diverse stakeholders, asserts that there is no "software exception" to this definition and urges the Ninth Circuit to reject any attempts to create one. The district court's reliance on the 1998 case Micro Star v. FormGen is criticized for being misapplied to functional works lacking protectable expression.

Why does this matter?

EFF underscores the potential threats to innovation, security, and repair if the district court's interpretation is upheld, emphasizing that developers should not be compelled to engage in legal battles due to a misreading of copyright law. Despite the absence of copied code, the court's broad interpretation of "derivative work" based on interoperability sets a concerning precedent. This could hinder adversarial interoperability, limit the creation of innovative tools, and pose threats to security and repair practices