11–20 of 637 posts
There are zero material consequences for a well-funded startup to pull shenanigans like this. Why should we be surprised this is happening?
Updated to include my tweet: https://twitter.com/MattHurewitz/status/1120356791932604421?...
Wait, I can make an app that unlocks my car??
Would love any feedback you may have!
I thought we all decided APIs shouldn't/couldn't be copyrighted because that was evil when Oracle and Microsoft tried to do it? I guess literally copy-pasting the docs is a flagrant violation, but it seems like that's the least of their problems. Presumably BigCorp will now get a cleanroom team to re-document the re-implemented API.
In theory, if you copy an API, you also copy its semantics. The docs for it are supposed to be interchangeable. Its touchy. For example, wouldn't most people rely and use the Java doc even for Android?
Now obviously, redistributing a copyrighted doc on their own website without permission is something else. Cause I'm guessing docs are copyrightable, but not APIs. The whole thing is getting more interesting to be honest.
I do have major issues with verbatim copying of documents and websites, there's an obvious copyright violation there.
This is a great opportunity for Bessemer, and the other investors, to demonstrate that it isn't returns above all. Updated to include my tweet: https://twitter.com/MattHurewitz/status/1120356791932604421?...
I thought we all decided APIs shouldn't/couldn't be copyrighted because that was evil when Oracle and Microsoft tried to do it? I guess literally copy-pasting the docs is a flagrant violation, but it seems like that's the least of their problems. Presumably BigCorp will now get a cleanroom team to re-document the re-implemented API.
I doubt it is so, but even if those tokens pass the threshold of originality[0], does a few blobs of superficial text justify a lawsuit?
Things would be dramatically different if they'd copied source code, but so far, it's just documentation.