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
Author, author! | 687 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
It is all auto-generated from source code and comments
Authored by: OmniGeek on Friday, April 27 2012 @ 02:17 PM EDT
Then I cannot imagine how the "selection, structure and organization"
of the specification could possibly be held to constitute protectable expression
as a separate work. That selection, structure, and organization are purely
artifacts of the way the underlying Java source code is organized.

There's no separate originality there whatever; it's exactly like a telephone
directory, its content and layout are dictated by an automated abstraction
process from the parent work (the Java source). All that is left is the stuff
functionally required to achieve interoperability, which, IIRC, is excluded from
copyright protection.



---
My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on
espresso.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

It is all auto-generated from source code and comments
Authored by: PJ on Saturday, April 28 2012 @ 02:21 AM EDT
Hey, what does this Sun page from 2008 mean, from Internet Archive:
Java - Sun's implementations of the Java specifications are all based on Free and Open Source code.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Author, author!
Authored by: Ian Al on Saturday, April 28 2012 @ 06:51 AM EDT
Unless all of the implementation source code files were written by the same
person, then the Java API Specification document is the aggregated creative
expression of many authors. It is in evidence that many parts of that creative
expression in Sun's document is copyright owned by third parties.

I have three questions,

1) Where is the single copyright document entitled Java SE API Specifications
in which the aggregated creative expression is fixated? (Don't even think of
pointing me at a ragbag of html files on a recent Oracle website!)

2) Where in that document is the acknowledgement of the individual copyrights
of the third parties?

3) Where is the evidence that Sun licensed those copyrights with the licence
condition that they can publish them freely in their own documentation, impose
overriding additional licence conditions in the way that they purport to do and
copy the SSO in those third party copyrights into their API implementations?

---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid!

[ 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 )