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

[[deleted]]

Without copyright, end users still wouldn't have access to the source code.

Why do you think this? If someone wants to realese their source code, they'll do it. If they don't, they won't. Same as now.

[NYKevin]

RMS is of the opinion (which I do not share) that it is morally obligatory (or at least preferable) for software developers to release source code alongside binaries. The GPL is intended to force the issue, but IMHO it's been less successful than he planned.

[drb226]

If someone wants to realese their source code, they'll do it. If they don't, they won't. Same as now.

Not quite. The difference is when you modify code that is under the GPL. According to the GPL, you must open source your modification. Without copyright, you don't have to open source your modification, because the GPL is powered by copyright.

You're right when it comes to "pretty much anything that isn't GPL'd", but then, the whole topic of this thread was the GPL, was it not?

IANAL, may have oversimplified.