so now that APIs aren't copyrightable, how can we legally define Mickey Mouse as an API
@balrogboogie unfortunately, APIs *are* copyrightable still. What this decision says is that "fair use" is a valid defense when being accused of violating the copyright of computer programming APIs, only.
@balrogboogie (of course, that does still mean that we are able to use Mickey Mouse if we somehow get the character defined as an API)
@balrogboogie
wait what? 😮 Did I miss something?
@yuki the US supreme court ruled in favor of google in oracle v google, so now "fair use" is a common defense to copyright claims on APIs
@balrogboogie
Yeah if Oracle won this would have been hell.
Now let's watch the Oracle execs panicking as they watch their stonks fall, lol 📉 😱
@balrogboogie That's not the ruling tho, they ruled that Google's use of the Java APIs was fair use, which has different implications.
@easrng i'm aware
@balrogboogie nuh uh, no way, you can't just make jokes, you have to be an insufferable pedant instead
@finn i have been sufficiently punished for my sins, I shalt never poast again
@balrogboogie Pedantry as a Service.
@viv that's what news.ycombinator.com is for
@balrogboogie LMAO, there should be an AI API that generates HN style comments.
@balrogboogie it's helpful for those of us who didn't get the news until they saw your op >_>
@balrogboogie it's a... mouse API, correct?
Technology is a passion of mine
@ljwrites "Mickey Mouse" is just a collection of simple components right? Ears, Buttons, and Racism
@balrogboogie use the mickey mouse api to find out who the fuck asked
@balrogboogie please i've been asking this all year to no avail
@balrogboogie he's just a collection of onMouse events, easy peasy.
and yes, i'm aware this isn't exactly the ruling, please stop being pedantic in my mentions