On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:01:53 -0500, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You're right that one technology being used instead of another won't > make a difference if the same end is achieved. But, in the same way, > "reach across a published functional interface" is a technical detail > whose significance depends on the end which is achieved.
The end being achieved is a major factor in finding a "functional interface" for legal purposes. I've cited various precedents on "functional vs. expressive" in software from US case law, of which Lexmark v. Static Control is the most recent and, in some ways, the most extreme. They seem to me (IANAL) to be well summarized by "use of a published functional interface doesn't infringe copyright". And any part of the program may be considered "functional" if it's required for interoperability -- even the complete binary (as in Lexmark). Even the "published" distinction isn't all that important as long as the means of establishing the functional interface were fair; reverse engineering for interoperability purposes has been found, pretty consistently, to be fair use. Depending on the contractual relationship between the parties, there might be separate cause of action for breach of contract or (for unpublished material) theft of trade secrets, but I think that none of the recourses of this kind that I have seen would be available under the GPL. The GPL is indeed an offer of contract, but it ties standards of breach so closely to copyright infringement that there isn't much room to argue that non-infringing use still breaches the GPL. Canadian case law seems to be similar, and Canadian courts make careful use of US precedents in this area (such as the "abstraction - filtration - comparison" test of Computer Associates v. Altai). I'd be surprised if US and Canadian appeals courts were to reach seriously divergent conclusions on facts similar to, say, MySQL v. Progress Software. Cheers, - Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
