[Discuss] can you copyright an API?

[markw at mohawksoft.com (Mark Woodward)]

On 04/25/2012 07:41 AM, Jerry Feldman wrote:
> On 04/24/2012 08:13 PM, Richard Pieri wrote:
>> On Apr 24, 2012, at 6:15 PM, Derek Martin wrote:
>>> I'm not sure what's left that could possibly prevent the GPL from
>>> saving the day.
>> Google claims that Dalvik is a clean-room implementation, not GPL.
> But, since Oracle is claiming the API is patented, the Dalvik JVM
> implements the API. So even if the developers did not ever even see a
> Sun JVM the issue is the API and the specifications.
I think I need to wade into this discussion before I lose my mind. 
Oracle, and specifically Boies with SCO before, are looking to harvest 
money from open source.

As I understand it, copyright was originally to protect artistic 
expression and patent is to protect invention, all for the promotion of 
"innovation" lol. The copyright laws seem to explicitly exclude mere 
aggregation of information like lists. So, a book is a work of 
copyright, but its index is not. Make sense? The patent laws try to be 
limited to processes or mechanics, more simply how things work.

Why all this crap is happening is because open source code represents 
billions if not trillions of dollars in R&D. I forgot the exact quote, 
but on groklaw (During the SCO trials) Boies made light that there 
should be a way to make money off that people wouldn't mind paying. 
These guys, combined with the likes of  MPIAA and RIAA have set out to 
redefine copyright in such a way that it can be used for anything.

To any reasonable person, its clear that an API is not something that 
can be copyrighted, it is an index of functions. Also, I don't know how 
Oracle could have patented the API, unless they patented the structure 
of java, which, of course, has plenty of prior art including VisualBasic.