Pam, I understood previously that was what you believe, but I don't agree with
you. Not all amicus briefs focused on the fundamental legal issues in the
Oracle v. Google case. Permission to use an interface (API) shouldn't depend on
the functional purpose of that interface, whether it be Android to work with
Java or as a replacement for Java for those running programs using Java. I
appreciate that the lower courts referred to misleading fair use and other
legal theories, but the bottom line for open source ("software freedom") is the
ability for software to interface functionally with Java or any other program
or language with impunity as long as they don't unnecessarily infringe
copyright on expressive source code. /Larry
From: License-discuss <license-discuss-boun...@lists.opensource.org> On Behalf
Of Pamela Chestek
Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2019 3:12 PM
To: license-discuss@lists.opensource.org
Subject: Re: [License-discuss] Copyright on APIs
The below is all well and good, also the law in the United States, and not at
issue in Google v. Oracle. Google v. Oracle isn't about interoperability of
devices or software. Android was not created to interface with Java or as a
replacement for Java for those devices or programs running Java. The case is
about whether it was lawful to copy portions of software to enhance the ease of
development of software for an entirely different software ecosystem. I'm not
expressing an opinion, simply pointing out that Google v. Oracle is a different
factual situation than what everyone seems to be concerned about.
Pam
Pamela S. Chestek
Chestek Legal
PO Box 2492
Raleigh, NC 27602
919-800-8033
pam...@chesteklegal.com <mailto:pam...@chesteklegal.com>
www.chesteklegal.com <http://www.chesteklegal.com>
On 6/30/2019 5:51 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote:
Thank you again Patrice-Emanuel, and thanks also to the EU for a much clearer
explanation of functional software interfaces ("APIs") than the brief but
equally relevant provision in 17 USC 102(b). I hope the US Supreme Court is as
clear in its decision in the Oracle v. Google case.
OSI should let "strong copyleft" die peacefully among the mistaken theories of
open source in any future licenses it approves. It is not a positive feature of
"software freedom."
Best, /Larry
_______________________________________________
License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss@lists.opensource.org
http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
