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
Florian Mueller's mysterious take...Part 3 | 392 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Florian Mueller's mysterious take...Part 3
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 01 2012 @ 03:38 AM EDT
But his order on this particular issue of API copyrightability happens to come down on the anti-property side of the spectrum
Uh, laws are exactly there for defining borderlines, and borderlines have two sides. Copyright laws are supposed to balance interests by establishing the lines for which content of symbolical form is treated like tangible property, and the way to do that is to restrict the ways in which the act of creating copies carrying the same content is permitted. This restriction is not supposed to be equivalent to as if the content never existed since obviously, this could be established by never telling anybody in the first place.

Florian Müller seems to be of the opinion that the law is not supposed to create a balance of interests while fettering unrestrained replication of original content that took more effort to create than the replicate.

Companies and their legal departments certainly like to think so. They are wrong.

But also plentiful, so Müller is not exactly alone with his views.

[ 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 )