decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Yes, fixed API expression is in source form | 503 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Yes, fixed API expression is in source form
Authored by: lwoggardner on Monday, April 23 2012 @ 06:43 AM EDT
But in order for copyright to apply doesn't it have to be
fixed somewhere rather than the abstract concept of the API.

In which case the answer to PJ's question is "Yes" the API
exists as Java (or C for those parts implemented natively)
source code, from which other forms, bytecode via javac or
html documentation via javadoc, are derived (or derivable)

So yes, if the API is copyrightable then Oracle have
released it under GPL via OpenJDK.

But this still leaves a problem because the GPL is
specifically targeted at source code that is turned into
binary code. It is not clear (to me) how the so called
"viral" aspects of the GPL would apply to such a nebulous
concept as an API. Without further clarification what kinds
of derivative APIs would be considered "linked"

This is similar to the reason that the Classpath exception
exists, namely that the GPL describes "linking" in a way
that makes sense in a C/C++ type world, but gets messy in
Java due to things like inheritance. The CPE makes it clear
what is considered linking for a java binary and what is
not.

All in all the world will be a much simpler place if the
good Judge rules that API's are not copyrightable.

We've know that the individual names are not copyrightable.
but is the order or parameters to a method copyrightable?,
is a collection of methods?, a collection of methods
arranged as a class?, an inheritance hierarchy of classes?,
a collection of classes in the same namespace (package)?.
Where do you draw the line?







[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

    Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
    Comments are owned by the individual posters.

    PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )