[Discuss] can you copyright an API?

[Matthew Gillen]

On 04/24/2012 05:11 PM, Derek Martin wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 04:19:04PM -0400, Matthew Gillen wrote:
>> On 04/23/2012 08:58 AM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>>> I loves me some android, so I don't want to see any harm come to it, but in
>>> this case, I think google f**ked up.  There were lots of ways they could
>>> have avoided all this mess... For one, they could have started with the GPL
>>> openjdk.  Even if they threw out and rewrote 99% of the code in there, as
>>> long as it started with code that Sun released under GPL, and they continue
>>> to develop all their modifications under GPL, then oracle wouldn't have a
>>> case against google...  But google didn't decide to do that.  
>>
>> No, that actually wouldn't have solved the problem.  Sun granted
>> automatic royalty-free patent licenses only for java implementations
>> that met the full java specification.  
> 
> The GPL explicitly grants you the right to modify and distribute any
> code distributed under it as you see fit, provided you distribute the
> modified source.  How could starting with the GPL-licensed code *not*
> solve the problem?

Because with patents it doesn't matter if you did a clean room
implementation. Using the technique described in the patent requires a
license from the patent holder.  Sun granted those licenses to openjdk,
but there were terms.  You can't start with openjdk, gut it, and still
claim compliance with the terms of the license.

Clean room implementations might protect you from copyright
infringement, but only if the API isn't copyright-able.

Matt