| |||||||||||||
RMS on Copyrightability of APIsRMS on Copyrightability of APIsPosted May 1, 2012 15:54 UTC (Tue) by nybble41 (subscriber, #55106)In reply to: RMS on Copyrightability of APIs by scientes Parent article: Fair use or "first excuse"? Oracle v. Google goes to the jury (ars technica)
> APIs and their implementations (and their use) is full of bugs, and unless forced to programs generally don't get it right. This shows that programs are derivative by default.
No, it only shows that _if_ a program depends on the bugs in a particular implementation, rather than an API common to all implementation, then it might be derivative.
If this sort of dependency is as common as you say then it shouldn't be difficult to prove that the application is derivative of the library implementation rather than just the API--but you still need to prove it for each specific application and library, not just assume it to be true "by default".
(Log in to post comments)
RMS on Copyrightability of APIs Posted May 1, 2012 18:06 UTC (Tue) by scientes (guest, #83068) [Link]
I'm sorry, you are right. In copyright the burden is on the accuser and copyright holder.
|
|||||||||||||