The court concluded that Oracle had established its prima facie case of copyright infringement as it br />
relates to the
The court next examined whether Rimini had a valid express license defense as it related to making RAM copies of the Oracle software in order to provide support to
Rimini "prototyped" or developed its Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("PPACA") Phase 1 update HCM104286 in
Accordingly the Court rejected Rimini's express license defense regarding making RAM copies in this environment.
Express License: Cross Use
The court next examined whether Rimini's use of the HCM104286 update developed in Campbell's development environment was improperly delivered to another Rimini client,
Although Rimini argued that the use of of the update created in the Campbell environment and used with another client was only at best a breach of contract and not a copyright infringement, the court rejected that argument. Instead the court found that "internal data processing operations" is a copyright-enforceable condition rather than a contractual covenant and was therefore a copyright infringement because it was outside of the scope of the license. Thus rather than being limited to contract damages, Oracle will be able to realize the full benefits of copyright law at trial.
City of Eugene
Express License: Derivative Works
Oracle argues that Rimini infringed on its exclusive right to create derivative works when
Rimini developed the PPACA Phase 3 update HCM104288. Oracle argued that not only was the individual update a derivative work, but the update as applied to City of Eugene's environment was also a derivative work. Rimini contended that while the update combined with the development environment may have been a derivative work, the update itself was not and that the development and testing was expressly licensed.
The court rejected Rimini's argument finding that the update was a derivative work and that by using it in City of Eugene's environment as a prototype for other clients, Rimini committed a copyright infringement as the use did not relate to City of Eugene's internal data processing operations. The court expressly rejected Rimini's "know-how" argument.
The court further found that Rimini's cross use of the update developed in the City of Eugene environment also violated the prohibition in the license on no distribution or sale of modifications to the software.
The court again found the "no marketing or sale" provision was a condition and not a covenant making Rimini's use a copyright violation.
Finally, the court rejected Rimini's fair use defense. Weighing each of the four fair use factors, the court found that they were either neutral or weighed in favor of Oracle.
Tactical Law will provide further updates on the court's ruling as they become available.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
Ms
Four Embarcadero Center, Suite 1400
CA 94111
Tel: 415766 3509
Fax: 415231 5272
E-mail: pam@tacticallawgroup.com
URL: www.tacticallawgroup.com
© Mondaq Ltd, 2020 - Tel. +44 (0)20 8544 8300 - http://www.mondaq.com, source