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
The API analogy thread | 394 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
The API analogy thread
Authored by: clemenstimpler on Wednesday, April 25 2012 @ 08:50 PM EDT
The "phone number" analogy is weak because anyone can publicise and instruct people to use different numbers.
You are in fact rehearsing a point made by Oracle: Google could have organised their directory differently. This is why I said:
So Google published its own directory. This directory had to follow the expectations of clients using Sun robots before.
You must keep in mind that the 'customers calling robots to their house' are Android app developers. They expect that core functionality is present when they write their Java app. They call a library via the API in order to get a job done they do not want to do themselves. Relearning dial up numbers in this context is equivalent to learning a new language. And keep in mind that protecting 'sequence, structure, and organization' via copyright implies that in some cases you may have to change the functionality involved. It is not enough to change 'plumber.repair.kitchensink' into 'pipe-and-water-technician.repair.kitchensink'. If I understand Oracle correctly, you have to change that into 'pipe-and-water-technician.repair.faucet.and.drain' or 'pipe-and-water-technician.repair.faucet.or.drain' in order not to copy SSO. This is what the whole problem is about: There are only so many ways to describe the functionality of an API in a specification. If this is protected by copyright, there might not be any way of expressing the desired functionality that is not covered by copyright ('pipe-and-water-technician.fixing.kitchensink' may be a derived work, based on 'pipe-and-water-technician.repairing.kitchensink).

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

The API analogy thread
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 25 2012 @ 09:16 PM EDT
> The "phone number" analogy is weak because anyone can publicise
and instruct people to use different numbers.

And you can write a different API and ask people to use it, but it will break
any machines that rely on calling those numbers automatically.

[ 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 )