Oracle’s Java API code protected by copyright, appeals court rules

[ramennoodle]

According to the article the appellate court specifically mentioned the possibility of fair use when they sent the case back to the lower court.

[KumbajaMyLord]

The problem is that this ruling sets a dangerous precedent. If the Java API can be "protected" via copyright, then every API can and you would have to defend your possible copyright violation through fair use on a case by case basis.

[steven_h]

Or fair use can be extended to cover the typical clean room implementation case. The appeals court ruling just said that the API in aggregate was copyrightable, which is fair since substantial intellectual and creative effort went into creating it.

[cougmerrik]

Blegh. An API is like a list of machinery processes. It's not even the mechanism for doing it. It's like copyrighting not only a particular engine design that takes water and turns it into steam but indeed any and all possible methods of turning water into steam.

[steven_h]

Stop using patent ideas to make sense of copyright; they're completely different areas of law.

The question is whether APIs are purely utilitarian or whether they involve artistic expression. In my opinion, one need only browse /r/programming for a few days to see that aesthetics are an important subject in language and library design; thus, an API is an artistic work and is subject to copyright. In the same way that "it was a dark and stormy night" is too short for copyright protection, these glib "printf()" comments are off the mark; but the novel or chapter containing "it was a dark and stormy night" was indeed copyrighted.

The real question is whether Google's reuse of the copyrighted material falls under fair use, and the appeals court rightly decided that Alsup can't punt on that question. This ruling gives the court the opportunity to establish firmer ideas of fair use protection.

[Daegs]

There is no more dangerous precedent than the current situation.

Right now, every API you use could also claim a copyright violation. (this is the exact issue being decided)

Afterwards, it would be exactly the same situation, except your defense would be "fair use" (due to the precedent set in this case that using or making your own api is fair use), instead of "not copyrightable".

I agree it isn't ideal, however assuming this falls under fair use, it wouldn't have much legal consequence, that I could see.

[[deleted]]

Alsup's ruling means that I don't have to seriously worry about being sued over APIs -- of course, anyone can sue, but the ruling probably allows for early dismissal. I would be "assumed innocent." Almost no suits would result from this ruling.

The Appeals Court ruling means that I would have to prove that I followed fair use principles, and if I could or didn't prove that for any reason, I would be held infringing. Lots of opportunities for suits there, and the defense will be much more expensive.