[Discuss] can you copyright an API?

[gaf at blu.org (Jerry Feldman)]

On 05/07/2012 02:52 PM, Tom Metro wrote:
> Tom Metro wrote:
>> Mostly is seems this is coming down to the issue of whether you can
>> patent an API - the names of classes, methods, and their arguments.
> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/05/jury-rules-google-violated-copyright-law-google-moves-for-mistrial.ars
>
>   ...a San Francisco jury issued a verdict today that the company broke
>   copyright laws when it used Java APIs to design the system. ... But
>   the jury couldn't reach agreement on a second critical issue--whether
>   Google had a valid "fair use" defense when it used the APIs. Google
>   has asked for a mistrial based on the incomplete verdict, and that
>   issue will be briefed later this week.
Here is what groklaw
(http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120507122749740) had to say
including transcripts.
[ Recap of the day: Google won everything but the one issue that the
judge has to decide anyway, the API SSO issue. The jury found, as they
had been instructed to assume for the purposes of deliberation, that
APIs can be copyrighted, the structure, sequence and arrangement of
APIs, but that is by no means established. The same question, in a b)
section, asked if fair use excused any infringement if found, and the
jury couldn't resolve that issue. But the judge has to decide whether or
not that is true, that APIs can be protected by copyright. That comes
later this month. Meanwhile, Oracle prevailed only on 9 lines of code
that Google admitted prior to trial to have included by mistake and then
removed from current Android. Oracle's own expert, the judge pointed out
in court, valued those 9 lines of code at zero. This is 9 lines out of
millions. So that means, if we are looking at damages, that so far
Oracle has won nothing. There is no liability. You can't have
infringement without considering fair use, Google asserts, and there
will be briefing on that. Somebody has to decide that fair use issue.
And then the judge has to decide about the API copyrightability issue.
If he rules that APIs can't be copyrighted, as the EU Court of Justice
just ruled, then fair use is moot. And Oracle takes nothing at all from
the copyright phase of this litigation, and this was heralded far and
wide by Oracle people as the big ticket item, if you recall.

Don't let anyone fool you. Today was a major victory for Google. That's
why after the jury left, our reporter says that Google's table was
laughing, and Oracle's mighty glum. And I see some journalists are
surprised or confused, because they have been listening to a steady flow
of Oracle FUD from the wrong people. Remember the headlines about this
being a $6 billion dollar case? It never was and now it never will be.
Oracle attorney Michael Jacobs was reported to have visited the press
room at the courthouse during the trial for a talk with the gathered
journalists. So did a PR person from his firm. I mean, come on, fellas.
And that doesn't even count the huge stream of misinformation from ...
well, you know. And look at the outcome. Not what you were told to
expect, is it? Live and learn, y'all. Live and learn. If a person is
paid by Oracle, why would you take it as necessarily so? And here's why
the API decision matters so much.]

-- 
Jerry Feldman <gaf at blu.org>
Boston Linux and Unix
PGP key id:3BC1EB90 
PGP Key fingerprint: 49E2 C52A FC5A A31F 8D66  C0AF 7CEA 30FC 3BC1 EB90