9 ms·

"Probably". Hah. That just shows the ramifications of Oracle winning this case are fucking insane. We've been operating as if this stuff isn't copyrightable

"Probably". Hah. That just shows the ramifications of Oracle winning this case are fucking insane. We've been operating as if this stuff isn't copyrightable for the last 50 years. You may as well burn the whole industry to the ground if they have their way.

leereeves 7y ago
> You may as well burn the whole industry to the ground if they have their way. At least in the United States. China, on the other hand, will laugh at us as they lay claim to everything American lawyers prevent us from doing.
sharpneli 7y ago
In EU interoperability is a valid reason to break copyright in this manner. It would matter here too though as we do also want to sell software to US. But if one stays out of US markets then things are as they have always been.
- wbillingsley 7y ago
  The EU has similar cases occur. For example between Lego and Best-Lock over what features of lego are copyrightable versus which are functional (and their competitors' minifigures are also designed to "interoperate" with lego bricks) https://thetmca.com/equitable-estoppel-defense-denies-lego-full-victory-in-copyright-case/ https://thetmca.com/equitable-estoppel-defense-denies-lego-f...
  - sharpneli 7y ago
    Yeah. As can be seen in that case they are focusing on things that are mandatory (non copyrightable) and those that are just stylistic choices (copyrightable). API compatibility doesn’t have any stylistic choices in it.
- hyperman1 7y ago
  Could you de-copyright things in this manner? Say I make locks that only open when they hear music from Disney's lion king. Are you allowed to play that song to open the lock, even without opening it? Does it matter if it was disney or me that made the lock? Silly example of course, can't think of any better. Feel free to substitute your own.