"very little precedent"? Judge Alsup specifically told Google's counsel to address the Johnson Controls decision.
Judge Alsup told Google's counsel that Google had to address the Johnson Controls decision with a view to the Java APIs.
>it's been 23 years since Johnson, and many cases (including the ones listed in the linked groklaw article) have touched on very similar areas of IP law. A smoking gun case on APIs is not necessary for there to be applicable precedent.
You are simply wrong on this. Why is a similar case not considered prior applicable precedent?
>EU court decisions certainly do indirectly influence judgements in the US. especially on tricky areas with very little precedent.
Johnson Controls v. Phoenix Control Systems
I don't care if you like Florian or not. look at the facts and decide.
Yes, and Alsup just asked Google and Oracle to address the EU decision on SAS v. WPL. They've both addressed many other relevant cases. Is this what we're going on?
> You are simply wrong on this. Why is a similar case not considered prior applicable precedent?
That was not what I wrote. What I said was that Johnson is not the only applicable precedent and that it was ridiculous to suggest otherwise.
I would say that logical arguments influence his decision, not "the EU court said this so..." As for being 23 years, it doesn't matter, a US Supreme court decision from the 1800's is precedent.
Well, that's what I said (I even couched my "influenced" with "indirectly"), but foreign opinions are cited as persuasive precedent at times. I have no idea what Alsup's track record is with that.
> As for being 23 years, it doesn't matter, a US Supreme court decision from the 1800's is precedent.
Certainly. As I wrote it, that was the introduction to suggesting that there has been plenty of time for applicable cases, even if none are a smoking gun for the copyrightable status of APIs.
While he likely will want to avoid wandering into new territories, it's been 23 years since Johnson, and many cases (including the ones listed in the linked groklaw article) have touched on very similar areas of IP law. A smoking gun case on APIs is not necessary for there to be applicable precedent.
Meanwhile, EU court decisions certainly do indirectly influence judgements in the US, especially on tricky areas with very little precedent. At the very least, in this case it gave Alsup another judge's perspective. The EU does have much more specific laws governing copyright here, but if you read the actual opinion or anything about it (instead of Florian's weird Fox News style mention of it), it goes into specifically why APIs should not be copyrightable and the chilling effects allowing otherwise would cause.
The idea that this is a matching game, "find the most similar court case and repeat the verdict" is, again, ridiculous.
Finally, stop registering new accounts just to quote Florian at us.