Google’s copying of the Java SE API was fair use [pdf]

Post by ISL » Mon, Apr 05, 2021, 4:10 PM UTC

qalmakka wrote: post #12

This is one of the most important legal decisions in the history of software. The US Supreme Court has basically just saved the whole software industry (and FOSS projects) from being wrecked by patent trolls.

Post by LogicUpgrade » Mon, Apr 05, 2021, 4:12 PM UTC

wmichelin wrote: post #400

LogicUpgrade wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Google copied approximately 11,500 lines of declaring code from the API, which amounts to virtually all the declaring code needed to call up hundreds of different tasks. Those 11,500 lines, however, are only 0.4 percent of the entire API at issue, which consists of 2.86 million total lines. In considering “the amount and substantiality of the portion used” in this case, the 11,500 lines of code should be viewed as…

I don't think it's fair to compare a programming interface, which is more analogous to designing something like the plumbing architecture for a house, to a movie script, which is art. Yes, a well-written API can be considered art, but with the plumbing analogy, a "copy-cat" would just be making sure the same pipes are connected to the toilets in the same positions. What's going on under behind the dry-wall wouldn't m…

Post by Gh0stRAT » Mon, Apr 05, 2021, 4:13 PM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #238

GavinMcG wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should it have been evaluated first? I understand the intuition you're getting at: logically, the first question could make the second irrelevant. But if the second question resolves the issue even when the first is construed in favor of the other party, what's the rationale for demanding the court focus on the first question?

IANAL, but I can imagine something like the following: A. We decide this is fair use based on the small number of LOC used and call it a day B. OR we can decide that APIs are not copyrightable even though they're self-evidently creative works because of the importance of interoperability based on something something related to Borland v. Lotus, a case that we couldn't agree on the last time it came up. Hey folks. Let…

Post by LogicUpgrade » Mon, Apr 05, 2021, 4:14 PM UTC

rhodozelia wrote: post #398

LogicUpgrade wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Google copied approximately 11,500 lines of declaring code from the API, which amounts to virtually all the declaring code needed to call up hundreds of different tasks. Those 11,500 lines, however, are only 0.4 percent of the entire API at issue, which consists of 2.86 million total lines. In considering “the amount and substantiality of the portion used” in this case, the 11,500 lines of code should be viewed as…

Maybe it is the same as using a similar plot, but with 0.4% of code lines being the same I think the analogy doesn’t carry through to using a script word for word.

Post by pseudo0 » Mon, Apr 05, 2021, 4:14 PM UTC

tantalor wrote: post #360

pseudo0 wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Thomas seems confused here. An API (declaring code) is not a computer program. A computer cannot execute declaring code - by definition - because it is missing the implementation. This standard doesn't really make sense, and the legal standard says nothing about executability. What about programs with external dependencies, or a code snippet? Those won't necessarily be executable in a self-contained sandbox, but I'…

> Declaring code defines subprograms Absolutely not. No points awarded. Declaring code declares subprograms. They are defined by the implementation. > A declaration provides basic attributes of a symbol: its type and its name. A definition provides all of the details of that symbol--if it's a function, what it does; if it's a class, what fields and methods it has; if it's a variable, where that variable is stored. ht…