|
|
|
| Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Thursday, May 03 2012 @ 05:11 PM EDT |
I think he'd be asking their take of the arguments the EU court put forth and
how that relates to US law, but I'm guessing.
Oracle's answer will be interesting.
---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.
"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: dio gratia on Thursday, May 03 2012 @ 06:22 PM EDT |
More a case of Oracle having cited the lower case ruling which has been
nullified by the European ruling as supporting their contention APIs can be
protected by copyright.
Oracle may need to scrabble around looking for something else to prop up their
API copyright theory. It's no longer about the whole wide world operating as
they said it does, the world's largest market just slapped down their theory.
Narrowing the effects of any ruling adverse to Google to U.S. markets becomes
more about anti-competition rather than promoting the sciences and arts by
offering an economic boon to the author(s) in harmony with other country's
copyright laws.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
