4 ms·
It's a literary work. It's copying the table of contents, but writing your own chapter text. I fail to see how it's not copyrightable as such. It appears to b
by count 7y ago
It's a literary work.
It's copying the table of contents, but writing your own chapter text.
I fail to see how it's not copyrightable as such. It appears to be a collection of facts (the interface of the implementation). These are not copyrightable, unless it meets the following:
"the work must be a collection and assembly of pre-existing material, facts, or data;
the work must contain the selection, coordination, or arrangement of those materials; and
the work is created by virtue of the particular selection, coordination, or arrangement of an original work of authorship."
I can't see how "arrangement of those materials" and "virtue of the particular selection or arrangement" isn't obvious here?
Oracle is pursuing the path where this case is literally about the contents of text files with words, which are supposedly well defined and understood under copyright law.
- wuliwong 7y agoAn API is more than a table of contents. When I write a method and give it a name and define what parameters it accepts, that is just as much part of the code as the inner workings of the method itself. I'm not a big fan of copyrighting in general but I am struggling to see understand how the code that defines an interface is separate from the rest of the code.
- monocasa 7y agoA table of contents, stripped of editing, is generally not copyrightable as is. It falls under mere listings of ingredients or contents exemptions.
- sixothree 7y ago> It's copying the table of contents, but writing your own chapter text That is a bit disingenuous. Using your analogy it would be the subject sentence of every paragraph in the book.