Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 31st May 2012 21:41 UTC
Legal And thus, it ends. Despite a never-ending stream of doom and gloom from Oracle/Microsoft-funded 'pundits' regarding Google and Android (six hundred billion trillion gazillion eurodollars in damages!!1!), judge Alsup has just squashed all of Oracle's chances with a ruling that is good news for those of us who truly care about this wonderful industry: APIs are not copyrightable. Alsup: "To accept Oracle's claim would be to allow anyone to copyright one version of code to carry out a system of commands and thereby bar all others from writing their own different versions to carry out all or part of the same commands. No holding has ever endorsed such a sweeping proposition." Supreme Court, Ellison?
Permalink for comment 520631
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: APIs not copyrightable
by dizwell on Mon 4th Jun 2012 07:02 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: APIs not copyrightable"
dizwell
Member since:
2012-06-03

Not so funny. Just the way it is. Promissory or equitable estoppel (or 'detrimental reliance') is so well established as a legal doctrine, both in the UK and the USA to name but two, that I don't care how big the company is or how many lawyers they hire: they're not going to win.

There are no legal developments in recent decades that make it a grey area. Quite the opposite: the doctrine is much more firmly developed now than it was, say, 60 years ago.

Whether it takes a 25-pound postal order, self-representation and a district court magistrate or two years and a large team of highly-paid barristers is really irrelevant to the issue at hand: you said "it's Microsoft and can we really trust any of their promises"... and my point simply is, trust doesn't come into it. The matter is justiciable, and that's all that really counts.

You appear to believe that the law is abused by big business merely to intimidate the little guys. I happen to believe, with good reason, that it's actually the law that *stops* big business trampling all over the little guys.

I personally don't think that's particularly naiive, but even if you do, it doesn't alter the fact that promises not to sue can't be withdrawn on a mere whim or without legal consequences.

Reply Parent Score: 1