Some 32 prominent computer scientists have weighed in on application programming interfaces (APIs) in the Oracle (News - Alert) v. Google lawsuit.

The scientists – such as Tim Paterson, MS-DOS author, and Larry Roberts, ARPANET developer – are represented by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) in an amicus court filed with federal court.

The EFF says the court should agree with a lower-court decision from U.S. District Judge William Alsup that APIs are not copyrightable. Alsup had overturned an earlier copyright infringement verdict. Oracle appealed the lower court ruling.

"The law is already clear that computer languages are mediums of communication and aren't copyrightable. Even though copyright might cover what was creatively written in the language, it doesn't cover functions that must all be written in the same way," Julie Samuels, an EFF attorney, said in a statement. "APIs are similarly functional – they are specifications allowing programs to communicate with each other. As Judge Alsup found, under the law APIs are simply not copyrightable material."

If APIs were copyrightable, “then developers can control who can make interoperable software, blocking competitors and creative new products,” the foundation said.

"Without the compatibility enabled by APIs that are open, we would not have the vibrant computer and Internet environment we experience today, with new products and services routinely changing the way we see and interact with the world," Michael Barclay, an EFF fellow, added. "APIs that are open spur the development of software, creating programs that the interface's original creator might never have envisioned. We hope the appeals court rejects Oracle's appeal in this case to protect technological innovation."

Oracle filed suit against Google (News - Alert) in 2010, claiming Google infringed on Oracle's copyright for Java APIs in connection with the Android operating system, according to news reports. But Google responds, arguing that APIs are not eligible for copyright protection.

"As computer scientists, amici have relied on the open nature of APIs and the programs built on them to create and operate new software," the EFF brief says. "Amici depend on APIs remaining open to sustain widespread compatibility standards used by startups and incumbents alike. Reversing the District Court would dangerously undermine the settled expectations of computer scientists who rely upon the open nature of APIs."

On the other hand, Oracle responds the “structure of the Java APIs that are in dispute are complex enough that they are a creative work that should be protected,” TMCnet said.