14 ms·

So here's a question: supposing APIs become copyrightable, doesn't that imply there also must be a way to license API implementations, including issuing free an

So here's a question: supposing APIs become copyrightable, doesn't that imply there also must be a way to license API implementations, including issuing free and open licenses? So although the idea of copyrighting an API strikes me as generally stupid and it could clearly be problematic for some developers in the short term, surely this isn't really that much of a hassle in the long term? People will just explicitly state whether or not they want to allow others to implement their API? I don't really consider that an improvement, but neither does it seem all that disastrous. I'm also curious how this will affect the geography of software development. Since the SCOTUS' jurisdiction only covers the US but there are international copyright treaties, will this decision affect development outside the US?

fixermark 8y ago
In theory, the market will adapt to track this layer of copyright, but the short-term shock effect is large. Since nobody's assumed APIs are copyrightable 'til now, nobody's been keeping track. So every API currently in use is under threat (especially since in the US, you don't have to file a copyright claim to have copyright; if you can just prove your API came first and there's reason to believe the younger API was familiar with your own, you can claim statutory damages, IIUC). It'll be exciting to see how many of Oracle's APIs are 100% derivative of some software released under Copyleft licenses... ;)
tdb7893 8y ago
The thing if that API compatibility is huge when it comes to migrating from one service to another. If an open source project can't reimplement an API then it means that it's way harder to migrate from a proprietary solution to an open one.
pron 8y ago
As APIs (at least those the court ruled on) are code, it appears they are licensed along with the rest of the code. Java's APIs would, therefore, be dually licensed under either a commercial license or an open-source license (Android originally complied with neither; I believe it now complies with the open-source license).

fixermark 8y ago

In theory, the market will adapt to track this layer of copyright, but the short-term shock effect is large. Since nobody's assumed APIs are copyrightable 'til now, nobody's been keeping track. So every API currently in use is under threat (especially since in the US, you don't have to file a copyright claim to have copyright; if you can just prove your API came first and there's reason to believe the younger API was familiar with your own, you can claim statutory damages, IIUC). It'll be exciting to see how many of Oracle's APIs are 100% derivative of some software released under Copyleft licenses... ;)

tdb7893 8y ago

The thing if that API compatibility is huge when it comes to migrating from one service to another. If an open source project can't reimplement an API then it means that it's way harder to migrate from a proprietary solution to an open one.

pron 8y ago

As APIs (at least those the court ruled on) are code, it appears they are licensed along with the rest of the code. Java's APIs would, therefore, be dually licensed under either a commercial license or an open-source license (Android originally complied with neither; I believe it now complies with the open-source license).