Expand the tree for each of them and for each of the things
you
can find in
them.
There is your SSO
Each page you can open is a "work as a
whole"
Then they copied all the names out into the source code,
symbol for
symbol.
Making a copy of the SSO.
Allegedly.
So the SSO is
the tree structure of names? There has already
been a ruling that the names and
signatures are not
protectable IIRC, so a tree structure of abstract data seems
like a pretty thin claim. Is an abstract tree structure of
unprotectable
elements now a copyrightable item?
The jury shall be told:
“The names of the various items
appearing in the disputed API package
specifications, such
as names of API files, packages, classes, and methods, are
not protected.” This instruction reflects the Court’s order
on summary
judgment (Dkt. No. 433).
It gets even less easy to protect
when you consider that the
unprotectable names are in fact the fully
qualified names
within the API.
From java.lang (for example - I
won't
use a claimed
one for fear of being sued :) ), there is no such thing as
"NullPointerException". There is
java.lang.NullPointerException. This has been
ruled as
unprotectable, and this unprotectable name defines the
SSO.
So a tree structure comprised of unprotectable elements, and
given a structure from the names of those unprotectable
elements suddenly
becomes a protectable item?
I am no lawyer, but I find that a bit
confusing
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|