The author of the generated code (eg. the person who made same) is the owner 
subject to the usual copyright ownership rules which apply to code



However, the generated code would most likely would contain other third party 
rights.



eg. the copyright owner of the source code would have some rights and the 
copyright owner of the compiler and third party libraries would also have some 
rights (check your licence about the use of runtimes).



Other rights may also subsist (eg. data/object model, schema, moral rights etc)



For further advice please contact me off-list.

Steve White
White SW Computer Law
m: +61 414 235 633
e: [email protected]
w: www.computerlaw.com.au

From: [email protected] 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Stephen Price
Sent: Monday, 1 February 2010 9:52 PM
To: ausDotNet
Subject: Re: Code generation and copyright

And such a copyright protects you from someone using your work of art in its 
original form. If someone copies the idea or does an interpretation then their 
work is a new piece of art and they own the copyright for their new art.

In the case of a real cartoon (the area i'm familiar with regards to 
copyrights) if I draw a cartoon and you photocopy it and put it on t-shirts 
then i'm protected by copyright laws. If you draw your own version of it (no 
matter how good it is) and put it on t-shirts then i'm not covered.
I'm not sure how that transfers over to generated code...

I did have a (crazy) idea for a program that outputs every combination of 1's 
and 0's to a floppy disk. Given there is a finite number of combinations that 
can go onto a disk, that means that my program can "write" any program at all, 
given enough time. So once I release my program, anyone who publishes a program 
on a floppy disk after I have released my program, I can sue them because they 
used my program to write theirs. I've not tested this idea so your milage may 
vary. :)

cheers,
Stephen

On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 4:51 PM, PhilB 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
My understanding is that anything you write is considered a work of art and
is hence considered copyrighted to you.
If you created a screen design with associated event code then this is
definitely your copyright, even though you may have used part of it from
another source (eg CodeProject.com).
I believe that this is the case even when you do custom software for a
paying customer.

If you were an artist who was engaged to paint a portrait of somebody who
later became famous, the painting may become valuable and be owned by
somebody. However I believe that they cannot copy it without your
permission.

If you pay to get house plans drawn up for you, you only own the ability to
show them to other people.
If you wanted to get the Autocad or Revitt source file then you would have
to ask very nicely and you may indeed be refused even though you have paid
for the design.

Having said that there are many countries that do not recognise
international copyright law.

-----Original Message-----
From: 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
[mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
 On Behalf Of Tony Wright
Sent: Monday, 1 February 2010 1:55 AM
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; 'ausDotNet'
Subject: Code generation and copyright

Hi all,

Possibly stupid middle of the night question:

I'm interested in knowing if anyone knows how copyright applies to code
generation. I'm talking about the code that gets produced, not the tool
itself.

Of course each piece of generated code will be unique based on any unique
inputs to whatever template you select. Is that what makes it yours?

I know people will probably make assumptions because we all do it - however
has anyone actually looked at what the implications of this is?

Regards,
Tony


Reply via email to