> On July 9, 2016 at 5:41 PM Lee Privett <lee.priv...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > There is an interesting bit on copyright that's list four things relating > to Software. One covers the code as literary, the other covers the output > from code as far as I can ascertain. > > The code is a literary work > The on-screen display could be an artistic work > The soundtracks are musical works > Moving images can be protected as a film and so on > > It goes on to cover non-literal copying of software, full article here. > http://www.inbrief.co.uk/intellectual-property/copyright-protection-for-software/ > > For me there is no question, it's copyrighted unless there evidence that is > not. Qliberator is a case in point, it's copyright protected until both > authors state it can be public domain. > > Now it is interesting for a discussion perspective about non-literal > copying if a protected programme is hacked and the software no longer has > its anti copying protection then effectively it's not the same software > anymore. >
I am fairly certain that just bypassing the copy protection would fail the substantial parts test (and any of hte other tests) as it would be easy to prove on a byte by byte comparison that there were only very limited changes to the original code. Arguably it would be harder to prove that some of my MKII software breached copyright under these rules (had I not originally obtained permission) - because the original code can no longer easily be proven - eg, substantial changes to D-Day and War In the East, which were originally SuperBASIC programs, then I re-wrote large sections in native machine code, added a large amount of my own code and then compiled them in Turbo - although here there is the issue of access to sources could easily be proven, as the sources (SuperBASIC) were provided in the originals. I am not sure whether Nemesis and possibly some of the other Talent adventures would be viewed in this light, as they were written in Quill, so had to be de-compiled, changed and then re-compiled as a Q-liberated program - leaving very little to compare apart from the actual text on screen. That said, both myself and Richard Alexander (when my programs were published by CGH Services) always felt that it was only fair to pay royalties on sales to the original copyright holders, or to offer my version as an upgrade to people who proved they had the original. Rich Mellor RWAP Software www.rwapsoftware.co.uk www.sellmyretro.com _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List
