For the purpose of this discussion there&#x27;s no need to argue what an API is because it matters little. Like I said, it is like arguing whether a story is copyrightable or not. It turns out that whether something is a story is not the relevant question, but rather the (first) question is how is that thing (call it a story or foo) recorded in fixed form in tangible media. Java&#x27;s APIs are recorded in fixed and tangible form; the Google Maps API isn&#x27;t. Again, <i>what</i> it is may matter when you start asking further questions, but the very first thing in the US copyright code says that in order for something to be eligible for copyright it must be fixed in tangible media.<p>Just to make clear: I am not arguing that Java&#x27;s APIs is copyrighted, just that there is good reason to see why -- from the perspective of copyright law -- the Google Maps API isn&#x27;t, regardless of the status of the Java API. They could be absolutely identical from your perspective, and yet different enough from the law&#x27;s perspective due to some minor detail that you -- but not the law -- may consider inconsequential.