5 ms·

While fuck Oracle and all that of course, I actually must admit I disagree that interfaces are trivial and, especially, not creative and thus worthy of copyrigh

While fuck Oracle and all that of course, I actually must admit I disagree that interfaces are trivial and, especially, not creative and thus worthy of copyright. I think interfaces are super creative, way more distilled ideation than implementations which are often bogged down with mundane details. I and work try to write programs very compositionally, and good interfaces are the keystone that makes this possible and productive. Put in a slogan, I must rather be forced to replace and rewrite my favorite implementations than replace and rewrite my favorite interfaces. Perhaps think a better argument in a better world is a symmetrical fair use one where if you invite people to consume (re provide) and interface, you must also allow people to provide (re consume) it. Unlike e.g. a flu vaccine, the market isn't preexisting but built around the interface. I dunno, I'm still thinking it over. Of course, given that's copywrite is insane, it might be prudent to pretend otherwise! (lastly a fun fact: harmony alone isn't copywritable while melody alone is.)

mongol 7y ago
Yes I agree in that there is a non-trivial intellectual effort to create an interface and that there are many things that are copyrightable which takes less effort. I think you create something tangible when you create an interface, perhaps comparable with a poem. I can certainly see it is "better for the world" if the court rules in Google's favour, but I will not be the least surprised if it does not.
- rapnie 7y ago
  > perhaps comparable with a poem. Like in: The implementation are the words and the API is what makes them rhime?
simonh 7y ago
The reason I dislike API protection is that an API is a description of a problem, not a solution to the problem. It may be a useful, well thought out description, but that’s all. It’s the plot, not the story and plots aren’t protected by copyright. In principle the plot is simply a byproduct of writing the story. Yes authors often plan out the plot first, but they don’t have to. If you just write a story as it comes to you, it will still have a plot. Likewise with an API.
- staticassertion 7y ago
  A novel API can totally be a solution to a problem, though. Hence API design being an area that we all spend lots of time thinking and learning about.
  - evgen 7y ago
    Could you please provide an example of an API that is a solution and not a description of how to access the solution? I am completely unconvinced by your assertion.
    - Ericson2314 7y ago
      http://strictlypositive.org/Idiom.pdf http://strictlypositive.org/Idiom.pdf https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.12.0.0/docs/src/GHC.Base.html#Applicative https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.12.0.0/docs/src/G...
  - simonh 7y ago
    Sure, but equally prospective authors spend a huge amount of work creating great plots, and a terrible plot can wreck an extremely well written story. They still can't copyright or otherwise protect them though, for good reasons. Protecting plots would have terrible negative consequences for creative arts, just as protecting APIs would have terrible consequences for the software industry. It's not 100% directly comparable, APIs are often more explicitly stated than plots, but I think the analogy is close enough to be useful.
    - jariel 7y ago
      An API is not a 'plot' - it's a very specific articulation of information. An API is more like a set of chapter headings and their descriptions. It doesn't matter that they are 'not a solution' to anything.
- paulddraper 7y ago
  > API is a description of a problem, not a solution to the problem. No, it's a description of functionality. > plots aren't protected by copyright You cannot copy another story if there is "substantial similarity." This would included having a point-by-point identical plot and characters. https://writing.stackexchange.com/a/3930 https://writing.stackexchange.com/a/3930
magicalist 7y ago
> I actually must admit I disagree that interfaces are trivial No one is arguing that they are trivial (or "not creative" as this argument has also been posed). There are many non-trivial (and creative) things that aren't copyrightable...for instance everything covered by patents.
- snuxoll 7y ago
  Or data, you can copyright presentation but not facts. Those facts can take a lot of effort to calculate, etc. - but ultimately they are not a creative work.
- Ericson2314 7y ago
  > ...for instance everything covered by patents Is this sarcasm? Patents are a mostly stronger form of IP protection, no?
clarry 7y ago
> Put in a slogan, I must rather be forced to replace and rewrite my favorite implementations than replace and rewrite my favorite interfaces. Then you'd better hope that your favorite interfaces aren't going to get copyrighted (by other people / companies who had the same idea). Otherwise you're going to have to replace your interfaces...

mongol 7y ago

Yes I agree in that there is a non-trivial intellectual effort to create an interface and that there are many things that are copyrightable which takes less effort. I think you create something tangible when you create an interface, perhaps comparable with a poem. I can certainly see it is "better for the world" if the court rules in Google's favour, but I will not be the least surprised if it does not.

rapnie 7y ago
> perhaps comparable with a poem. Like in: The implementation are the words and the API is what makes them rhime?

simonh 7y ago

The reason I dislike API protection is that an API is a description of a problem, not a solution to the problem. It may be a useful, well thought out description, but that’s all. It’s the plot, not the story and plots aren’t protected by copyright. In principle the plot is simply a byproduct of writing the story. Yes authors often plan out the plot first, but they don’t have to. If you just write a story as it comes to you, it will still have a plot. Likewise with an API.

staticassertion 7y ago
A novel API can totally be a solution to a problem, though. Hence API design being an area that we all spend lots of time thinking and learning about.
- evgen 7y ago
  Could you please provide an example of an API that is a solution and not a description of how to access the solution? I am completely unconvinced by your assertion.
  - Ericson2314 7y ago
    http://strictlypositive.org/Idiom.pdf http://strictlypositive.org/Idiom.pdf https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.12.0.0/docs/src/GHC.Base.html#Applicative https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.12.0.0/docs/src/G...
- simonh 7y ago
  Sure, but equally prospective authors spend a huge amount of work creating great plots, and a terrible plot can wreck an extremely well written story. They still can't copyright or otherwise protect them though, for good reasons. Protecting plots would have terrible negative consequences for creative arts, just as protecting APIs would have terrible consequences for the software industry. It's not 100% directly comparable, APIs are often more explicitly stated than plots, but I think the analogy is close enough to be useful.
  - jariel 7y ago
    An API is not a 'plot' - it's a very specific articulation of information. An API is more like a set of chapter headings and their descriptions. It doesn't matter that they are 'not a solution' to anything.
paulddraper 7y ago
> API is a description of a problem, not a solution to the problem. No, it's a description of functionality. > plots aren't protected by copyright You cannot copy another story if there is "substantial similarity." This would included having a point-by-point identical plot and characters. https://writing.stackexchange.com/a/3930 https://writing.stackexchange.com/a/3930

magicalist 7y ago

> I actually must admit I disagree that interfaces are trivial No one is arguing that they are trivial (or "not creative" as this argument has also been posed). There are many non-trivial (and creative) things that aren't copyrightable...for instance everything covered by patents.

snuxoll 7y ago
Or data, you can copyright presentation but not facts. Those facts can take a lot of effort to calculate, etc. - but ultimately they are not a creative work.
Ericson2314 7y ago
> ...for instance everything covered by patents Is this sarcasm? Patents are a mostly stronger form of IP protection, no?

clarry 7y ago

> Put in a slogan, I must rather be forced to replace and rewrite my favorite implementations than replace and rewrite my favorite interfaces. Then you'd better hope that your favorite interfaces aren't going to get copyrighted (by other people / companies who had the same idea). Otherwise you're going to have to replace your interfaces...