Other than just wanting to be able to copy other people's work as they often do all the time anyway, I'm not sure I understand major tech giants' argument as to why APIs would not be copyrightable. They are, if anything, much harder to make well than their implementations.
Do you have some evidence of that? So far, courts have construed even direct digital copies as non-infringing for a variety of reasons (thumbnails, for example). I don't think we have any evidence that courts do what you are suggesting they do?
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Actually, US law very much distinguishes between music and software. Music copyright has entire extra _sections_ of the law specifically for it, so you definitely cannot generalize from music to software. (This is why, for example, there is a compulsory license for music.)
End of conversation
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.