> Blanchard's own claim—that he worked only from the test suite and API without reading the source—is, paradoxically, an argument for protecting that test suite

> Blanchard's own claim—that he worked only from the test suite and API without reading the source—is, paradoxically, an argument for protecting that test suite and API specification under copyleft terms. Ridiculous. I don't want specifications for proprietary APIs to be protected, and I don't want the free ones to be either. The software community seemed pretty certain as a whole that this would be very bad for competition [1]. Morally, I don't think there's anything wrong with re-implementing a technology with the same API as another, or running a test suite from a GPL licensed codebase. The code wasn't stolen, it was capitalized on. Like a business using a GPL code editor to write a new one. > This is not a restriction on sharing. It is a condition placed on sharing Also this doesn't make any logical sense. A condition on sharing cannot exist without corresponding restrictions. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/mklieg/supreme_court_in_a_62_ruling_in_google_v_oracle/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/mklieg/supreme_cou...