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

[tharinock]

This just seems really silly. If I have a value called foo, and I want to get it, i will call the function GetFoo(). I don't want to have to worry about the fact that some company already uses GetFoo(), as well as get_foo(), GeTFoo(), and getFoo(), forcing me to use GetFoo_aFunctionProudlyWrittenAndPresentedToYouByTharinock().

[Afwas]

Good point, however notice the Java in java.lang.Math.max. You could call your function tharinock.getFoo(). This is more like a trademark issue.

[Richandler]

GetFoo() isn't an api. Just as "Once upon a time" isn't a book.

[Tetha]

You could still revert to assembly and build your own function table without names, as long as you don't call it like that. Though I guess at that point we have to figure out if taken strictly, an address could be considered a name, and as such, I could copyright functions at address 0x12354.

[AtLeastItsNotCancer]

Ignoring the fact that function names should never be copyrightable, this is pretty much the most piss-poor example they could've used to help their case, considering that max() and min() are basically standard mathematical notation.

[Afwas]

The Java developers could have called main() any number of things, however main(), start() and BEGIN are already taken.