281–290 of 643 posts
So, for those like me who don't quite understand all the legalese: I've been operating under the belief that APIs and protocol "structures" were ruled as "non-copyright-able" before, while "implementations" absolutely were copyright-able. Was I wrong then, or am I wrong now?
I'm confused...
How about we stop using Java. It's a terrible language anyways.
I don’t even hate Java that much I just hate the Java is the only “serious programming language” attitude so common in this industry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you oppose copyright on all software, i. e. source code, as well? Because I could somewhat understand that sort of IP anarchism, although I wouldn't agree. But I'm having a hard time thinking about a coherent reasoning to see source code as copyrightable, yet deny the same to APIs. Copyright applies to any creative endeavours that reach a certain level of breath and/or depth. Having been involved in a few library…
>Do you oppose copyright on all software, i. e. source code, as well? That has nothing to do with anything. Copyright is a human construct. Somethings are decided to be copyrightable and somethings are not. Not every creative endeavor should be copyrighted, other should, and other should with major limitations. APIs were never copyrightable. Ever. The computing and programming industry developed with this assumption…
You're just asserting tradition. Yet you are not addressing my examples that directly show precedent within the industry for recognising copyright for APIs.
Good. Initially, I thought the API decision was a bad one, but now I think the courts got it right. If you've ever wrestled long with getting a program to compile, you realize it's non-trivial to wrap your brain around complex types. The API is a language and the compiler is a runtime producing output. I can design my API in something like Java and return null from all the methods while I do it. The compiler will sti…
Would you apply your reasoning to JavaScript, so that Safari and Chrome would be illegal due to failure to obtain a license for the JS APIs? What about Linux? Linux copied the Unix syscall interface. What about Wine?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Devil’s advocate here... the method signatures, the layout of the classes, what inherits from what, what bits are private vs public, are all pretty non-trivial. Moreover it’s where a lot of the subjective decision making happens, whereas the actual implementations are straightforward once you know what the method signatures should be. I don’t necessarily agree with the decision but I can see where they’re coming from…
Triviality isn't the determining factor of what's copyrightable. Edit: And particularly there's tons of case law that this stuff isn't copyrightable, see Sony v. Bleem, where a company literally wrote an emulator of a PS1, and courts said that was fine. Even to straight up sell as a competing product, and for running on competitors machines. Edit2: And the otherwise shitty DMCA even has explicit exemptions for softwa…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you oppose copyright on all software, i. e. source code, as well? Because I could somewhat understand that sort of IP anarchism, although I wouldn't agree. But I'm having a hard time thinking about a coherent reasoning to see source code as copyrightable, yet deny the same to APIs. Copyright applies to any creative endeavours that reach a certain level of breath and/or depth. Having been involved in a few library…
>Do you oppose copyright on all software, i. e. source code, as well? That has nothing to do with anything. Copyright is a human construct. Somethings are decided to be copyrightable and somethings are not. Not every creative endeavor should be copyrighted, other should, and other should with major limitations. APIs were never copyrightable. Ever. The computing and programming industry developed with this assumption…
http://patents.2012.apievangelist.com/2017/12/07/2012-08-23-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The court has made the point now that literally just the class and method names are subject to copyright.
Devil’s advocate here... the method signatures, the layout of the classes, what inherits from what, what bits are private vs public, are all pretty non-trivial. Moreover it’s where a lot of the subjective decision making happens, whereas the actual implementations are straightforward once you know what the method signatures should be. I don’t necessarily agree with the decision but I can see where they’re coming from…
Another reminder never to do business with Oracle.
Oracle (Sun) paid probably hundreds of engineers to invent and maintain Java. As James Gosling says https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYw3X4RZv6Y&feature=youtu.be... they gave away a lot but charged big companies to pay the expenses. Google should have paid that freaking licensing fee
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you oppose copyright on all software, i. e. source code, as well? Because I could somewhat understand that sort of IP anarchism, although I wouldn't agree. But I'm having a hard time thinking about a coherent reasoning to see source code as copyrightable, yet deny the same to APIs. Copyright applies to any creative endeavours that reach a certain level of breath and/or depth. Having been involved in a few library…
Yes, I (personally) oppose patent protection and copyright on software, and barring that, severe time limits, like say, 5 years. You really think an API should be protected from forking or reimplementation for A CENTURY? It's absurd, Oracle agrees with me (see link at bottom) The entire PC industry was launched because clean room re-implementation of the API of the BIOS broke IBM's stranglehold. Is the world better w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see how the size of the spec has anything to do with it. It could be the standard height of doors or the standard interface/protocol between every sensor and smart component in a smart home. What if I create my own smart home server that can be a drop in replacement for some commercial product using just what I've gather from their public API? Is that infringement, when the underlying implementation is entire…
You can't copyright trivial work so the size of the spec matters. It depends on how you create your server. If you go to their website, look at their API, and start typing identical code then that's not ok. It's pretty clearly copying. If you do black box testing and then write your own API that's fine. It's clearly not copying but a new original work.