Supreme Court Declares ‘Fair Use’ For Parts Makers

Supreme Court Declares ‘Fair Use’ For Parts Makers

The U.S. Supreme Court has affirmed the ability to build replacement parts compatible with OE software.


Written By Camille Sheehan, Auto Care Association

The Auto Care Association recently reacted in support of the Supreme Court’s ruling yesterday in the Google v. Oracle case surrounding a decade-long copyright dispute over software. “The Auto Care Association is pleased with the April 5 decision by the Supreme Court, which stated that application program interfaces are fair use for building compatible components,” said Aaron Lowe, senior vice president, regulatory and government affairs, Auto Care Association.

The case, Google v. Oracle as originally decided by a Federal Circuit Court, had found in favor of Oracle that Google had violated a software copyright when it copied a small part of the application program interfaces (API) code necessary to enable interoperability with programs for Google’s Android platform. The Auto Care Association, along with Static Control, filed an amicus brief on Jan. 13, 2020, regarding the potential that if the lower court decision had been permitted to stand, it would severely limit the ability of aftermarket companies to produce compatible replacement parts for software-driven vehicles. 

In its brief, the Auto Care Association emphasized that auto parts manufacturers and remanufacturers often need to ensure that their software is compatible with what is installed by the original equipment manufacturers: “While this Court consistently has interpreted intellectual property rights so as not to interfere with the public’s right to repair the chattels they own, the Federal Circuit opinion would allow OEMs to leverage copyright to bar independent competition for replacement parts and repair services,” the brief states. The Auto Care Association’s brief urged the Supreme Court not to permit copyright protection “to API-declaring code that specifies the data and functions necessary to interoperability.” about:blank

“It is clear from the decision that the Court understood the implications of permitting companies to copyright APIs in order to prevent lawful development of compatible replacement parts and to perform vehicle repairs,” said Lowe. “We appreciate the Court’s understanding of the impact on competition of software copyright issues.”

View the Auto Care Association’s full amicus brief here.

You May Also Like

EV Charging

Charging will get better as technology improves and drivers change their behaviors.

I once worked with a technician you might call considerate. When he used a piece of equipment, he would ensure everything was clean and properly put away. For example, we had a five-gas analyzer used for state emissions testing. After every time he used the machine, the hose for the tailpipe probe was neatly coiled and hung on the machine. When he used the machine, the hose was laid on the ground and not dragged across the shop’s floor. He also was the guy who would dispose of the filters left in the oil drain by other technicians.

Keep On Rockin’ Into The New Year

We’re still accepting nominations for the next Vehicle Care Rockstar.

Quality Triumphs!

If a brand of parts has a great reputation and hasn’t caused a comeback, stick with that brand.

Being Happy Gets In The Way of Being Successful

Bryce Kenny says his greatest satisfaction comes from helping others to find the courage to chase their dreams.

Do OEM Service Bays Offer Opposition or opportunity?

With great power, of course, comes great responsibility.

Other Posts

It Ain’t Bragging If You Can Back It Up

It can be difficult to sit and read about yourself.

Putting Yourself First For Safety

Policies and procedures are only as good as those following them.

Why Is NHTSA Involved With RTR?

A closer look into NHTSA’s involvement with RTR.

How Effective Are Non-Competes for Shops and Technicians?

NCAs restrict workers, hinder innovation, and impact employment options.