Oracle are unlikely to appeal, especially because it was a jury case. >If the jury and judge had ruled that API's were copyrightable, who knows what that could

Oracle are unlikely to appeal, especially because it was a jury case. >If the jury and judge had ruled that API's were copyrightable, who knows what that could have done to sites like Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest and any other site that relies on a third party framework, library or piece of code to functionally operate. The jury did see that Google infringed copyright by implementing the APIs, however this doesn't impact others in the way you've stated because using an API isn't the same as copying someone else's, and even then it was still narrowly defined. >Oracle are the rotting enterprise dinosaur that refuses to accept evolution and adapt or just die. This isn't all true, while I'm certain their motivation was not in the right place to begin with, the case they brought did have merits regarding the fragmentation of java. (As there are similarities to the microsoft case.)