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
A "fair use" win for Google would still be a loss for society | 238 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
A "fair use" win for Google would still be a loss for society
Authored by: DieterWasDriving on Monday, April 23 2012 @ 08:01 PM EDT

To this point APIs have been considered to not be covered by copyright.

Saying that they are covered by fair use is a disaster for the productive
technical world.

Right now you can't reasonably be sued for using an API. If using an API is
actually "fair use", you can be sued. Once in court you have to prove
that what you did is OK, which is asymmetrically difficult and expensive. Even
if such cases are won 99% of the time, it's likely to start at hundreds of
thousands and a year to be cleared.

This judge seems to be considering expanding what copyright covers by judicial
rather than legislative means. If the reporting is accurate, he is already
saying that the copyright covers SSO, even if he hasn't yet decided on the API
issue. That's a dramatic statement.

Imagine writing a history book. The natural way to break the text into chapters
is by era. Very likely they would be defined by wars, or when influential
leaders were in power. But if SSO is part of a book copyright, in the future
you will have to research if any other history book uses the same structure and
sequence. Even if you didn't use that book as a reference, it may have
influenced a source that you did read.

Only months ago I would have said that it's very unlikely that a judge would
declare that copyright protection extends to API. Now I'm wondering if the
absurd will happen.

Google isn't likely to object. The situation gives them several bites at the
apple. The jury could decide that they didn't violate the copyright. the jury
could decide that what they did was fair use. Or the judge could

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

The Judge was not saying he has made up his mind
Authored by: bugstomper on Monday, April 23 2012 @ 10:29 PM EDT
Judge Alsup did not say that he has made up his mind that SSO of API is
copyrightable. He said that he would first have the jury decide whether in this
case it would be fair use even if it is copyrightable, in which case the
question of copyrightability is moot, and only decide the thornier issue if he
has to.

[ 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 )