Re: NO! (Re: Does GNUstep infringe on Apple's Intellectual Property?)

[Pascal Bourguignon]

Scott Christley writes:
> 
> Well I still disagree, but it isn't my intent to get involved in an 
> email war, so I will make a last reply and leave it at that.  As always 
> John, it is best if you talk to a real lawyer regarding your specific 
> situation,

And place.


> * There are numerous instances where APIs are clearly considered 
> confidential trade-secrets and the copyright owners will vigorously 
> defend its rights.  A recent example are DVDs; you are not allowed to 
> write a program which will read (decrypt) a DVD without a license, as 
> that one russian? guy discovered.  A DVD isn't strictly an API, but it 
> could be considered an advanced data structure which are often part of 
> APIs.  IBM is another company which keeps some of its APIs close to the 
> breast; they've gone after numerous companies who have duplicated their 
> mainframe and minicomputer APIs, both software and hardware.

Specifically  here, in  France  we  are even  entitled  to do  reverse
engineering  to   discover  an  API   to  allow  us   to  interconnect
subsystems. Note  that an  API is  symetric, and if  what you  want to
interconnect to is not the mainframe but the peripherals, I think this
allow you to imitate any system basing on its interfaces. IANAL.

 
> * Translation, rearrangement, compilation, etc. maintains the original 
> copyright.  So if you wrote a program which read in the OpenStep spec, 
> did some fancy translation work, then spit out a rearranged version; 
> that output is still covered by the original copyright.  Most of these 
> actions produce a composite work of multiple copyrights; the original 
> plus yours for the "original translation".  This is why you find that 
> special clause in the GPL about how the license does not apply to OS 
> libraries; because most programs need to #include in a system header 
> file (copyrighted by the OS owner) and therefore the resultant compiled 
> code is a composite work.

Yeah!    That's    a   very   funny    consideration!    "Translation,
rearrangement,  compilation,  etc."   I  hope lawyers  will  be  asked
royalties by God in time, for their reproduction.


> Anyways, what I took from my discussions with the lawyer is that APIs 
> are well protected by copyright law.

-- 
__Pascal_Bourguignon__                   http://www.informatimago.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do not adjust your mind, there is a fault in reality.