So what? Every open source project license I've seen has a big fat copyright at the top of it too. Microsoft didn't invent copyright. If coders get to apply it to every line of copy-pasted code they "write" then Oracle should be allowed to copyright an API.
API's are not functional code, they are specifications on how to communicate with said code, these specifications have never been considered copyrightable until Oracle and Microsoft started this legal campaign.
Non-copyrightable API's is in turn is the reason we enjoy atleast some level of interoperability today, as API's and their corresponding functionality can be re-implemented across platforms despite all the 'vendor-lock in' companies like Microsoft have tried to enforce.
>If coders get to apply it to every line of copy-pasted code they "write"
This is not true, copyright applies foremost to the work as a whole, not each indivudual line, this was already proven as Oracle lost their attempt at copyright infringement on a 9 line rangecheck function, which was ruled as fair use.
> API's are not functional code, they are specifications on how to communicate with said code...
Code is not code, it is a specification on how to build machine language. Does that make my code any less valuable?
> ...these specifications have never been considered copyrightable until...
That's correct. Also, nothing was copyrightable until someone started a legal campaign.
> ...copyright applies foremost to the work as a whole...
So copyright can apply to an API as a whole because an API is the same thing as code. APIs are not free. People have to design them and test them, just like when they write code. What universal law do you think grants you the right to just take someones work?
> Non-copyrightable API's is in turn is the reason we enjoy atleast some level of interoperability today...
Yes and tax loopholes are legal until they're not too. Just because you're getting something for free already doesn't mean you're somehow guaranteed entitlement to it forever.
