On 02/04/2013 22:31, David Kastrup wrote:
Anthonys Lists <antli...@youngman.org.uk> writes:
Indeed, this legal claim (that using functions creates a derivative
work) is exactly the claim that Oracle tried with Android and Java,
and they came a royal cropper with it.
"exactly" in the meaning of "quite the opposite of". Oracle did not try
to cover code intended to compile with their Java libraries, but rather
tried to prohibit a compatible reimplementation from scratch of the Java
code implementing the APIs.
So Oracle was trying to prohibit reimplementing the code _behind_ the
APIs, whereas we are talking about the implications of the APIs on the
code _calling_ them.
Hmmm... I don't think that's the way they actually put it. That's what
they were trying to do, true.
But as I understand it, the lawsuit as actually sued said "apis are
copyright" and you would have needed a licence to use the apis - to use
Oracle's Java.
Cheers,
Wol
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
