Re. Oracle vs Google, I believe Oracle's arguing it's the method names themselves, so a formal expression of the exposed functionality. These are methods like

Re. Oracle vs Google, I believe Oracle's arguing it's the method names themselves, so a formal expression of the exposed functionality. These are methods like math.min and math.max. If your Java implementation doesn't have methods named math.min and math.max, regardless of how they're written, a whole lot of Java programs aren't going to work. This (in my opinion) falls into the "there's only a few [efficient] ways of making it work" category, and shouldn't be copyrightable. But I guess we'll see what happens once courts resume. http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120531172522459 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120531172522459 (another, separate, point of contention in Oracle v. Google is the rangeCheck method, the code of which is identical in both implementations. but there's only so many ways to write a rangeCheck function...)