On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 7:06 AM Kevin P. Fleming <kevin+...@km6g.us> wrote:
As a software developer I have a hard time accepting that designing an > API is not a 'creative' process. Oh, it is. But lots of kinds of creativity aren't protected by copyright, or aren't as fully protected as you might think. Architectural copyright in the U.S. prevents you from constructing a building based on architectural plans (or on another building) without a license from the copyright owner, typically the architect. (The plans themselves are also protected as images and text, of course.) But it will not protect an architect who designs a bridge or a dam, as they are not, per court decisions, buildings. And the functional parts of buildings are not protected at all, nor are common architectural elements (scenes a faire) such as domes, arches, towers, etc. It's at least as hard to design a plumbing system for a large building as an API, but there is no copyright protection for plumbing. John Cowan http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan co...@ccil.org That you can cover for the plentiful and often gaping errors, misconstruals and disinformation in your posts through sheer volume -- that is another misconception. --Mike to Peter
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
