*BSD News Article 89271


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!metro!metro!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!howland.erols.net!news.nacamar.de!news.apfel.de!news-fra1.dfn.de!news-koe1.dfn.de!main.Germany.EU.net!Dortmund.Germany.EU.net!interface-business.de!usenet
From: j@ida.interface-business.de (J Wunsch)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.misc
Subject: Re: GPL
Date: 12 Feb 1997 13:06:03 GMT
Organization: interface business GmbH, Dresden
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <5dsf7r$8bp@innocence.interface-business.de>
References: <32DFFEAB.7704@usa.net> <5cmiuu$iud@garuda.synet.net>
  <5cokgi$alm@web.nmti.com> <L3U8y0gTz/TM091yn@ibm.net>
  <32F167BB.41C67EA6@freebsd.org> <0rnuc5.3e1.ln@zen> <5cvodo$hme@omega.gmd.de>
  <5db0q8$1f6i@usenet1y.prodigy.net> <5dd2mc$ad5@omega.gmd.de>
  <5dqmfu$2hqo@usenet1y.prodigy.net>
Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@interface-business.de (Joerg Wunsch)
NNTP-Posting-Host: ida.interface-business.de
X-Newsreader: knews 0.9.6
X-Phone: +49-351-31809-14
X-Fax: +49-351-3361187
X-PGP-Fingerprint: DC 47 E6 E4 FF A6 E9 8F  93 21 E0 7D F9 12 D6 4E
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.misc:158712 comp.unix.bsd.misc:2514

davidsen@tmr.com (bill davidsen) wrote:

> I'm trying to avoid snipping this out of context, but do I
> understand that if you buy a book you can add a chapter and
> republish it without the permission of the original author?

No.  However, as i've already stated elsewhere, applying copyright law
to software is something (at least here) the copyright law has never
been intended for.  Copyright law usually judges by some kind of
``artistic value'', not by functionality.  So it's likely here that a
fundamental wrt. functionality but only three-line patch won't
constitute anything remotely falling under copyright law here, while a
complete restructuring of some source without changing the least bit
on its functionality could likely be considered an entirely new work
in sense of the copyright law by a judge here.

So basically, to `steal' some piece of code here, it's not unlikely
that all you need is to simply restructure its layout (so the
appearance of the code and thus its ``artificial value'' has been
modified), and then claim your own copyright on it.  From the POV of
copyright law, this makes sense: if you for example copy (by painting,
i mean) a picture of some great painter, you doubtlessly have created
a new work by this.  Thus, you own the copyright for it.  (And as long
as you don't claim this being the original work, you can do what you
want with it.)

All this only proves that copyright law is simply not suitable to
protect software.  At least here.

-- 
J"org Wunsch					       Unix support engineer
joerg_wunsch@interface-business.de       http://www.interface-business.de/~j