1. Facts of the case

Download 10.55 Kb.
Hajmi10.55 Kb.
2 5382084395484063139 (2)

1.Facts of the case: Oracle America, Inc. is suing Google LLC for unauthorized use of Oracle's Java programming language. The trial court initially found Oracleʼs copyright infringement. However, Google LLC initially contested the ruling, claiming that Oracle America, Inc. used a different "expression" of the Java programming language. As a result, the Court finds in Google LLC's favor that Google's claim has merit
2.Legal Issue in question: Did Google LLC Infringe Oracle America's Copyright? Doesnʼt Google LLS's use of another "expression" of the Java programming language, which defied the original court ruling, violate intellectual property rights?
3.Reasoning of the court(s): The original court ruling ruled that Oracle America's copyright had been infringed by Google LLC. However, Google LLC claims to have used a different "expression" of the Java language, which supports its argument. Google LLC, which provided irrefutable evidence, found that the copyright was not infringed and ruled in its favor.
4.General legal significance: In this controversial situation, it is noted that the protection of intellectual property rights and the proper use of copyright are necessary. If found to be infringing copyright, there may be severe consequences. Also, evidence is invaluable in conflict situations. I believe that Google LLC, which used a different "expression" of the Java programming language, won a court case based on the same specific arguments.
5.Search more information online and give your personal reaction as a law student with good reasoning: As a student and researcher in the legal field, this case is a controversial one about the nature of intellectual property rights and copyright. In this case, Internet sources also have hesitations and different approaches. Specifically, Google LLC's copying of the Java language infringes Oracle America's intellectual property rights. But it is said that Google LLC did not copy Java programming language in its entirety, but a small amount. Google LLC used it only for a new invention. If Oracle America, Inc. wins, the innovative industry will faces major obstacles in the future. In conclusion, I must say that copyright is a hot topic in the field of law. Inventions, innovations and any works of art are protected by law. Violation of copyright results in criminal and civil liability. In particular, it is noteworthy that Article 149 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan and Articles 1041-1073 of the Civil Code deal with copyright
Ислом фуқаролик ҳуқуқида ижара бир шахснинг иккинчи бир
шахсга бирор ашёни муайян муддатга, келишилган пул (ижара ҳақи)
эвазига фойдаланиш учун беришидир. Агар бирор ашё бошқа шахсга
фойдаланиши учун берилаётганда манфаат (ижара ҳақи) кўзланмаса,
бу муносабат “орият” атамаси билан юритилади. Бу икки ҳуқуқий
муносабатни шу маънода бир-биридан фарқлаш лозим. Қуйидаги
ҳолатни таҳлил қилинг ва тўғри ечимни тақдим этинг.
Аҳмад исмли шахс ўзига қарашли кўчмас мулкни текин
фойдаланиш учун таниши Собирга орият битими орқали 5 йил муддатга
топширди. Орадан 2 йил ўтгач, Собир мазкур мулкни бошқа бир шахсга
ижара шартномаси орқали келишилган ижара нархида 3 йил муддатга
ижарага берди. Орадан бир йил ўтгач Аҳмад Собирдан кўчмас мулкни
ўз ихтиёрига қайтаришни талаб қилди. Бу даврда унинг мулки учинчи шахсга ижарага бериб бўлинган эди. Бу ҳолатда ижара шартномасини
бекор қилинадими? Бир йил давомида олинган ижара ҳақи кимга
берилиши лозим: Аҳмадгами ёки Собиргами? Жавобингизни изоҳланг!
Download 10.55 Kb.

Do'stlaringiz bilan baham:

Ma'lumotlar bazasi mualliflik huquqi bilan himoyalangan ©fayllar.org 2024
ma'muriyatiga murojaat qiling