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?
E-mail Print r 18   73 Comment(s)
Thread beginning with comment 520331
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Overstating the case
by kwan_e on Fri 1st Jun 2012 10:59 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Overstating the case"
Member since:

It would be a clear rip-off of very hard work in gcc to rip off GIMPLE. I think you are underestimating how much is involved in that stage of gcc, and would possibly argue that it doesn't fit your idea of what an "API" is, but it is still just interface code. Making a legal distinction of what is interface and what is implementation is hopeless.

Yes, and that is more reason to err on the side of freedom than to go immediately to the protection route.

I think we might have to agree to disagree when it comes to what we want here, but personally I am very much on the side where sufficient innovation expressed in an interface should get protection.

There are no benefits from protecting an interface, but a lot of drawbacks.

Reply Parent Score: 3