7 ms·
> If API's are copyrightable > And if you're in the camp that believes APIs should not be protected, this precedent--if it stands--means that you'll have to sh
by magicalist 10y ago
> If API's are copyrightable
> And if you're in the camp that believes APIs should not be protected, this precedent--if it stands--means that you'll have to shoulder the expense of going to trial on the fair use issue before winning on the merits.
worth remembering that since that decision was made by the Federal Circuit, it has no bearing on the rest of the court system when it comes to copyright. There is no place where "APIs are copyrightable" is binding precedent.
Any lawsuits that don't end up in the Federal Circuit (which pure copyright suits never do) will have to start from "are APIs copyrightable?" before having to make any sort of fair use defense.
- farcical_tinpot 10y agoFair point. I'm reminded why I don't get too familiar with US law in these cases. Starting from "Are APIs copyrightable" all over again? Great......... More legal fees, court time and nonsense.
- serge2k 10y agoJust has to happen once though.
- pfg 10y ago> Any lawsuits that don't end up in the Federal Circuit (which pure copyright suits never do) [...] It seems (based on this case) that you could make that happen by simply throwing in a patent claim, even if you'd get defeated on that point (which happened to Oracle). Not sure if that's a general rule one could exploit, or something that just happened in this case?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- DannyBee 10y agoThis actually gets exploited all the time to get into the Federal Circuit's "arising under" jurisdiction :)