How people choose to spend their time is definitely not the "real question" here. The real question is it legal to write software that interacts with an API which is covered by someone else's copyright (assuming you can even copyright an API) without their express permission?
Since that happens pretty much every time you write a line of code, I would say it's a pretty important question. Whether or not you distribute said software, whether you distribute it in binary or source form, and whether you charge for said software are all interesting confounding variables and it would be extremely interesting to delve into whether those factors impact the result.
Keep in mind this is simply software which sends and receives packets over a network. The server has no obligation to response, and there is no "linking" of libraries. Let's assume that none of WhatsApp's code is being distributed (assume a clean room implementation of the API, not decompiled from WhatsApp source)
I wonder if things like if WhatsApp included a magic string in the header, and then claiming copyright of that string, if that could also impact the legal result.
Since that happens pretty much every time you write a line of code, I would say it's a pretty important question. Whether or not you distribute said software, whether you distribute it in binary or source form, and whether you charge for said software are all interesting confounding variables and it would be extremely interesting to delve into whether those factors impact the result.
Keep in mind this is simply software which sends and receives packets over a network. The server has no obligation to response, and there is no "linking" of libraries. Let's assume that none of WhatsApp's code is being distributed (assume a clean room implementation of the API, not decompiled from WhatsApp source)
I wonder if things like if WhatsApp included a magic string in the header, and then claiming copyright of that string, if that could also impact the legal result.