4 ms·

> Is it because of API compatibility? But the notion that one cannot reimplement a public API for the sake of compatibility is in and of itself extremely hostil

• thomascgalvin 8y ago
  Unless I missed something in the appeals, the result of Oracle v Google was that APIs are copyrightable, but that an implementation of that API for compatibility purposes is fair use. So Oracle "owns" the Java API, but Google was allowed to clone that API to make Dvalik work with Java source code. The same should be true of MongoDB's API. MongoDB Inc owns the copyright, but if someone wants to make a compatible API, they should be covered under fair use.
  • dragonwriter 8y ago
    > Unless I missed something in the appeals, the result of Oracle v Google was that APIs are copyrightable, but that an implementation of that API for compatibility purposes is fair use. The result (so far) of Oracle v. Google is that Googler use was not fair use as a matter of law; that, however, was the result of an interlocutory appeal to the CAFC, and we still have further action at the district court for a judgement, and probably at least one more appeal up the chain, potentially the whole way to the Supreme Court, before we know the final outcome.