3 ms·
I like the outcome from a public policy perspective. The policy the court has imposed is good for the industry. But let's make no mistake -- this is legislating
by ccleve 6y ago
I like the outcome from a public policy perspective. The policy the court has imposed is good for the industry. But let's make no mistake -- this is legislating from the bench.
The wholesale expropriation of an API is not the same thing as taking a small snippet of a copyrighted work for analysis, commentary, criticism, or scholarship. It is core the value of the work.
Indeed, it's the most important part, because it defines the functionality of the product. It is what the customer sees and interacts with. It is the means by which the customer gets value. You can completely swap out the backend behind the API and the customer will still get value. Change the API and the value goes away.
From a legal perspective, this decision is 100% wrong. The plain language of the law makes that clear.
What should have happened here is that Congress should have passed an amendment to copyright law allowing for fair use of an API. They should have done so after a free and full debate, with due consideration to all economic consequences.
It is not for our black-robed, un-elected overlords to make this decision.
- mrkstu 6y agoLet's take the 'on a computer' portion out of it. If I specify that my company takes orders that only have certain header columns and must have specific format in certain fields on the bill of goods, is that /specification/ (not the full text I wrote, but the facts of the specification itself) copyrightable? Why? I don't see that the abstract facts of a specification of interoperability should receive any kind of copyright.
- ccleve 6y agoAs a matter of public policy, I agree that the specification should not receive protection, but under the law as written by Congress, it does. Thomas's dissent is correct. My comment is about process, not policy.
- monocasa 6y agoUnder the law, they do not receive protection. See Baker v. Selden, which despite it's age is still good law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_v._Selden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_v._Selden
- ccleve 6y agoNo. Baker v. Selden does not settle the question of APIs and fair use. That is why the Google v Oracle case made it to the Supreme Court.
- monocasa 6y agoIt does say that the facts of a traditional print formatting specification (ie. the specific subtopic we're talking about) is not granted copyright protections.