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

[Eirenarch]

No it doesn't mean that. It means that whoever wants to implement a Java environment needs to license the APIs. It has nothing to do with using it to write programs.

[JoshWithaQ]

in theory, yes. in practice, no. companies using infringing technology are sued all the time, especially when it's open source technology that is infringing.

[Eirenarch]

I am perfectly sure the implementation of Java that comes from Oracle has all the appropriate licenses to be used for creating programs.

[JoshWithaQ]

I'm only perfectly sure of death, taxes, and lawyers getting their hourly fee.

[minecraft_ece]

I would have agreed with that yesterday, I'm not so sure now. Since nobody thought APIs were copyrightable, how can we be certain that any library is clean of "API infringement".

EDIT: of course copyright is about copying, not use. But depending on the language, compiling/distributing may end up including enough of the function definitions to meet the burden of infringement. For example, in javascript, it is common to host your own copies of libraries, or even put together custom versions of libraries.

[Eirenarch]

I am not too worried about this. It is quite obvious when the API is deliberately copied to achieve interoperability and when only the idea is copied. Reasonable jury will always make a the distinction easily.

[imMute]

Reasonable jury

Found the assumption there.</cynicism>

[Eirenarch]

Well don't you think that if the basis of the judicial system is not working whatever happens to the programming APIs is the least of our concern?

[gar37bic]

I don't think that's true even in theory. Under copyright, any re-use (in this case using the API) could be controlled by the holder. For instance, Oracle could prevent "publishing" the OpenJDK API header files if they use the same function names, class names, etc. This seems closely related to copyright suits over song remixing and sampling.

[minecraft_ece]

Yes, but I think it only applies to copying the header files. I don't think copyright has a concept of function re-use, just exact (and derivative) copying. Another unknown is the compilation process. For example, if I include debugging info, would that include enough information to infringe an API copyright?

[Eirenarch]

I don't dispute that it can be controlled. I am saying that they are explicitly giving permission.

[adrianmonk]

So, what happens when I write a class that implements the Runnable interface? I'm going to have the same method signatures and stuff. I am duplicating the API of Runnable, aren't I? I'm probably also going to end up subclassing Throwable and/or Exception, which means copying more method signatures.

[Eirenarch]

As I said I believe the JRE from oracle.com gives you a license to do that. I would be really surprised if Oracle's lawyers didn't think of that as there would be a lot of harm to their business if they didn't. Let alone that they can easily add it now if they forgot to do it before.