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
Close to what the Judge can rule on | 503 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
An API cannot be copyrightable because it has no fixed form
Authored by: jvillain on Sunday, April 22 2012 @ 11:26 PM EDT
I thought I read some where that the courts have ruled that a programming
language can't be copyrighted for your reason but also because giving one
company control over a programming language would give them an unfair advantage
harming competition. If that is the case and you can't do any thing with the
Java language with out using the API then by extension giving any one company
control of the API would also give one company to much control.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Close to what the Judge can rule on
Authored by: hardmath on Monday, April 23 2012 @ 11:30 AM EDT
The no-fixed-form objection to Oracle's claim is certainly
an ingredient. I wait to see how Judge Alsup will employ
it.

The objection is a bit easier to apply to the Java
programming language itself, alongside the themes of
unprotectable names (e.g. keywords) and of merger of
expression and method of operation.

The APIs are more extensive, but if it were me (and IANAL
much less a judge), I would start from the premise that the
APIs are the functional way in which the Java programming
language changes (extensions and deprecations). So I'd
agree with you that no-fixed-form is the central issue.

But it needs to be gussied up with the unprotectability of
names (which fully represent the structure and organization
of the APIs) and the merger doctrine.

One other tack the Judge is onto is that many APIs were
contributed in whole or in part by third parties.

---
Do the arithmetic or be doomed to talk nonsense. -- John McCarthy (1927-2011)

[ 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 )