@taradinoc @Dravorek But basically the long and short of it is a) the Supreme Court has never considered the copyright part, and...
@taradinoc @Dravorek Right, that is what they are saying: because there is _no actual creativity_ there to protect.
-
-
@taradinoc@Dravorek You cannot automatically extend that to an API that was _actually creative_, like say, a physics API or something. -
@taradinoc@Dravorek In this case the argument was that it's not creative because _it doesn't do anything other than lock out_. - Show replies
New 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.