4 ms·
> This is not so simple. The court ruled only about a particular case... But this case would be a very significant precedent...
by pulse7 8y ago
> This is not so simple. The court ruled only about a particular case...
But this case would be a very significant precedent...
- mercer 8y ago...
- rbanffy 8y agoThis seems dangerous to anyone reverse engineering an API to, say, port it to another language or runtime. Is the Win32 API copyrighted? If so, is the ReactOS project in danger? Is Haiku?
- pron 8y agoFirst, porting to another platform may well fall under fair use: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_America,_Inc._v._Google,_Inc.#Appeals_Court_and_finding_of_non-fair-use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_America,_Inc._v._Google... Second, companies don't sue you just to make a point or to show they're right; success is never guaranteed, and corporate lawsuits are expensive -- not only in direct monetary cost but in PR costs as well. Companies use lawsuits when there's actual serious damage done to them which they want to recuperate, or to prevent such imminent danger of serious damage. If you cause serious damage you should expect to be sued regardless of whether you did something wrong or not, and even if you do something wrong but don't cause serious damage, chances of a lawsuit are low[1]. So while certain things may certainly increase your exposure, what puts you in danger is the harm you do more than the rules you break. Projects that mimic or port the Windows API would be in danger -- whether now or before the lawsuit under discussion -- when they can cause serious damage to MS. [1]: This may be different for trademark violations; I think trademarks require vigilant defense or they could be lost.