Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by smadurange 2404 days ago
I don't think the comparison with literature makes sense.

API is what defines a software. For instance, if someone copies Microsoft suite full public interface (including the UI which is part of the interface it would be a problem even if the implementation was different).

API signature is the UI equivalent for a library/programming interface software. So, I agree with the original commentors concerns here. Oracle's got a point too.
1 comments
eqvinox 2404 days ago
> API signature is the UI equivalent for a library/programming interface software.

It isn't. "A main window with toolbars and an edit area." is the equivalent of the API signature. The layout, icons, ordering, etc. is artistic work of the "how" and copyrightable.

(FWIW by your logic, LibreOffice would be violating Microsoft's copyright already and we could only ever have one office suite in the world.)

link
wbillingsley 2403 days ago
No, that's not a reasonable interpretation of his comment. Other OO VMs (e.g. dot NET) exist and do not have the Java API. Google's argument is that the API is required to maintain compatibility with Java programs, not bytecode-based VM programs in general.
link