Google v. Oracle case is the current federal trial in the United States. About six years ago, Oracle, namely Oracle America, sued Google for “patent and copyright infringement … over Google’s use of Java Application Programming Interfaces (“APIs”) in its Android Operating System” (Alam, 2019, p. 39). The case was in consideration of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The court ruled that Google violated the rules of fair use and should pay monetary compensation to Oracle (Samuelson & Crump, 2020). However, Google filed an appeal with the US Supreme Court; therefore, the final decision remains unknown.
There are two possible outcomes of this court case in relation to the tech industry business. If the ruling is in favor of Oracle America, stagnation of the market for small and medium tech companies will occur due to the need to acquire a license for software and compatible programs. If Google wins a lawsuit, a technical and economic upsurge in the digital economy could happen. It is why many of the leading tech corporations support Google at the moment (Tung, 2020). If the court takes the side of Oracle of America, this will mean the emergence of a new leader in the digital sphere. Otherwise, the corporation will suffer reputation losses.
The Google v. Oracle America case represents a legal confrontation between a limited liability company (LLC) and a corporation. It is worth noting that in 2017 Google was reorganized into an LLC (Hosch & Hall, 2020). The formation of an LLC provides tax reduction, flexible administrative staff, and a guarantee of the preservation of investments (Gitman et al., 2018). However, there are also disadvantages, such as legislative prohibitions on operations and extra taxation (Gitman et al., 2018). Each member who leaves the LLC should be liable for obligations since they are informed about corporation data, as well as the company is obliged to maintain the confidentiality of private data (Workplace Fairness, 2020). For disclosure of personal data of employees or another tort or crime, the corporation must be punished. The appropriate penalties are fines or mandatory structural reform of the company (Diamantis, 2017). Articles of incorporation represent a standard business plan, but the incorporation process itself requires considering many federal and state legislative nuances regarding business (Gitman et al., 2018). It means are easy to understand but difficult to enforce.
Shareholders should be personally liable for financial flaws and failures of the corporation in which they hold shares, although such a type of liability must also have its limitations. For example, the personal financial responsibility of LLC shareholdings is limited to the sum of all investments (Simon, 2020). Members of the board of directors also have their corporate liabilities and punishment for non-compliance. They become personally responsible when they commit illegal activities, violate fiduciary duties, engage in financial fraud, use corporate resources for personal purposes, or do not comply with legal documentation (Masters, 2020). Other forms of business organizations also have significant advantages over LLCs.
Sole Proprietorship provides the entrepreneur with privacy, independence, and all income, and the partnership is attractive for its low organizational costs (Gitman et al., 2018). There are also franchises for the purchase of which the entrepreneur should pay attention to its status, financial situation, structural flexibility, and marketing factors (Grossmann, 2017). The main differences between the partnership model and the LLS model are the level of liability and initial costs. Partnership entrepreneurs have unlimited obligations, while LLP businesspeople’ are limited, although they spend more money to form an organization (Gitman et al., 2018). That is why the global economy is undergoing a period of corporate domination since LLCs ensure the safety of personal funds of entrepreneurs and investors. Nevertheless, top corporate management more frequently consider the implementation of monitoring practice. This means that officer protection is not of an absolute nature.
References
Alam, D. (2019). Oracle v. Google. DePaul Journal of Art, Technology & Intellectual Property Law, 26(1), 39-54.
Diamantis, M. E. (2017). How to punish a corporation. The CLS Blue Sky High Blog.
Gitman, L. J., McDaniel, C., Shah A., Reece, M., Koffel, L., Talsma, B., & Hyatt, J. C. (2018) Introduction to business. OpenStax.
Grossmann, R. (2017). Franchise Bible: How to buy a franchise or franchise your own business. Entrepreneur Press.
Hosch, W. L., & Hall, M. (2020). Google. Encyclopedia Britannica. Web.
Masters, T. (2020). Can the officer of a corporation by held personally liable? Chron.
Samuelson, P., & Crump, C. (2020). Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc.-Brief of 72 Intellectual Property Scholars as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioner. Brief of, 72, 1-34.
Simon, A. (2020). Are shareholders personally liable for company debts?
Tung, L. (2020). Microsoft and IBM: Here’s why we back Google in Oracle Java API copyright case. ZDNet.
Workplace Fairness. (2020). Leaving your job.