|
|
|
| Authored by: calris74 on Wednesday, April 25 2012 @ 10:42 PM EDT |
You would run afoul if you copied the plans of any of the
buildings (the 9
lines would be akin to having maybe one
room in the entire development having
the same dimensions
with the same placement of Window and door)
Your
analogy would make Oracle's 'SSO' claim a claim against
the plans for the roads
and which buildings are put in which
locations along those roads. And if this
was a housing
development dispute, it would be a slam-dunk for Oracle
because
those plans would most definitely be covered by
copyright. But in
software, APIs are not
covered by copyright (just ask
Microsoft)
One of the things Oracle is basing their case on is that the
order of the class and function declarations is the
same and that there
is artistic input into that order
and therefore, covered by copyright.
What makes me wonder
is, what if Google simply randomised the order of the
declarations in each class file?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Ian Al on Thursday, April 26 2012 @ 09:47 AM EDT |
The builder of a housing estate is infringing upon a town plan by copying part
of the SSO and building in another town.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
