@AC2 ... Re: @Jamie Jones... Wash, rinse, and repeat.
I know as much about this case as the next man.
And suggest you try to find the licensing agreements for Java (SE and ME)
Yes JavaME is a subset that was meant to run on mobile devices at the time. Of course there's Moore's law where you could run Java SE on a mobile device at the time of the lawsuit and even more so today.
But again you're missing the point.
Where Java ME comes in to play was the fact that Google wanted to circumvent payment of licensing fees to Oracle. (Considering the Billions made on Android...)
There's more and the bottom line is that before you start to discuss it... SCOTUS has to first agree to hear the case. Assuming RBG is no capable of hearing the case... you again could find a 4:4 split. Of course that assumes that SCOTUS will consider this along the same lines of the earlier spreadsheet argument which split the court 4:4
The point is that the bottom line is very much in Oracle's favor if they don't screw up in the event the courts do want to hear it.
NOTE: I think both companies are piles of evil shit. I'm merely commenting on it from a legal perspective.
Under Copyright Law, you have fair use which would allow you to use the APIs for interoperability. But in this case... that wasn't the point. Even in the earlier case where SCOTUS split 4:4 the use of interoperability was to steal customers away. So you could see today's SCOTUS even take a more considervative approach and rule in Oracle's favor. (Which is why they will probably agree to not hear the case because it will set a precedence which could have negative ramifications and by not hearing it... the lower courts would have latitude to make their own decisions.)