You clearly missed that fact that no judge, anywhere, would hold up names as why something was copyrightable. Instead, as my sibling comments say, what was foun

You clearly missed that fact that no judge, anywhere, would hold up names as why something was copyrightable. Instead, as my sibling comments say, what was found copyrightable was the "structure, sequence and organization" of their API. The court said that Google copied the whole package structure of Java, including a whole tree of names.