I also took issue with that argument. I suppose you could argue that the declarations are statements for the compiler or JVM. But even then, there is a layer of

I also took issue with that argument. I suppose you could argue that the declarations are statements for the compiler or JVM. But even then, there is a layer of translation that is problematic, in my opinion. If you were to say that public int max(int x, int y); Is a program that tells a compiler or VM to add an entry to its public symbol table that allows it to compile or execute third-party code utilizing this function, and that the declaration, by itself, then qualified as a computer program and could be copyrighted, where would you draw a limit? Would two different programs that produce identical assembly instructions infringe on each other's copyright? What about system calls for an OS? For example, Linux system calls have names, but they also have numeric identifiers. If someone copied Linux system call names in a new BSD-licensed OS, would they violate the GPL? What if they only copied the numbers? It's interesting to think about. I'm glad this was the minority opinion.