|
|
|
| Authored by: Ian Al on Sunday, April 29 2012 @ 04:05 AM EDT |
Any ideas published on an Android website are unprotectable by both Google and
Oracle and are not proof of copying from a copyright document, compilation or
collection. Oracle have to be clear on what copyright they are asserting and
where that creative expression is fixated.
Java SE API Specification: Where is the single medium of fixation (lots of
recent unregistered web documents don't count). Does it have the tree chart
fixated into the registered copyright document that shows the SSO? If not, can
it be seen, clearly, by the organisation of the creative expression (Chapters,
paragraphs, bullet points, lists etc.)? Are there one or more Android works that
are shown to copy this SSO (It does not matter if the copying is into several
documents like library code files)?
A registered compilation of files: Does the file list in the Java registration
use directories and sub-directories or some other mechanism to express the SSO
in the form of compilation? Are the names of the files (as Oracle claim)
sufficient to identify the SSO, or is that just an idea created by the names
and, therefore, unprotectable? If the compilation is unregistered, what other
evidence is there that an automatic copyright was created when the compilation
was made? Was the compilation ever created, or is the compilation just an idea
in the mind of an informed reader (as in 'I can discern that if one puts all
those libraries together one gets the minimum necessary to program for the Java
platform')? If the compilation is only apparent to the reader as an idea or
concept, it was not a creative expression fixated into a medium.
A registered collection of files: Only the selection is protected. Furthermore,
it is a protection of a collection of pre-existing works (as in, you have to
paint the picture first before putting it in the collection). A tree
organisation of your art collection (perhaps according to the emotions each
piece arouses in you) is only copyright creative expression when fixated in a
medium no matter how obvious it is to viewers of the collection.
In summary, copyright protects from unlicensed copying of the creative
expression you fixated into a medium. You have to prove in court that you own
the copyright in the asserted document. It also protects the owner from
unlicensed copying of the structure, sequence and organization of a registered
compilation. Finally, it protects from substantial copying from a registered
collection.
I have heard several comments that copyright has to be registered before it can
be litigated. I don't think that is true. Otherwise, the judge would not permit
the jury to decide the facts when it is not clear whether a collection was
registered or a compilation was registered. In the same way that copyright is
automatically granted when creative expression is fixated in a medium, the same
must be true when a compilation is fixated or a collection is fixated. However,
the key is the fixation. Where is the legal proof that the SSO that Oracle wish
to protect was fixated in a medium before Google copied it? I don't accept any
Oracle website created after the fact. I would want to see a book, paper or
website published by Sun that fixated the copyright expression that Oracle want
to protect.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
