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 | # ]
|