- Last Active
bkkcanuck said:Rayz2016 said:bkkcanuck said:I disagree with the Federal Court.
API is just the interface (e.g. add(operand1, operand2) - i.e. no implementation to that - and implementation is basically 99%+ of the code).
Being able to use an API for compatibility purposes is no different than for example Open Office being able to implement the file format for Word. The need for competition outweighs the argument as an API protected IP. Google's implementation uses the API (common) and then the implementation code which is probably more than 99% of the code base. As long as Google did not copy the code itself the API itself should be fair use. Languages and APIs should not be able to be protected as API.
The court has already previously ruled that you cannot protect interfaces for hardware for the purposes of locking out the competition on things like printer cartridges etc. An API is not much different than the software equivalent.
Identical lines of code don't lie. All available in Scribd online:
My iPhone 5 took the better part of an hour and a half, but it installed successfully first time around. Initially, it downloaded faster than both my iPad Pro 9.7" and my iPhone 5S (smaller payload?), verified the download first and started installing, but then was overtaken, first by my iPad then by the 5S. After a long while, I was greeted by the welcome screen and all is good so far, with crisp and snappy operation...