I happen to see a big difference.
1) Winning by the "chess move" is simply
winning this portion of the case by a mere technicality. Winning by
technicality by judge or jury that actually makes no difference, as its almost
inconsequential unless you happen to be Google.
2) Had Google not played
the said "chess move", then we would have had a clear decision from the bench
on the actual copyrightability of API's in general, which would be of
enormous value to the software industry.
Clearly the end effect of
the two different ways to win the copyright case are not even comparable.
Understandably Google wants to win by any means necessary, but it just would
have been nice to have the precedent rather than the technicality. We all know
that FM will undoubtedly be twisting this technicality around and spinning into
a completely different reality in an Alternate Universe with the media.
--- DRM - As a "solution", it solves the wrong problem; As a
"technology" its only 'logically' infeasible. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|