Chris Walker wrote:
Richard Edwards wrote:
Sorry, I hate to see the fear factor determine what can be done:)
I agree completely.
The divergent approaches to this from Google and the BBC (as represented
so emphatically by Mr. Loosemore) couldn't be more startling.
Copyright is an interesting can of worms, that so many developers choose
to ignore because on the face of it, it's nothing but a PITA that can
instantly dim the spark of (technical) creativity.
However we do all of course have obligations under the current copyright
legislation, hence not publishing such code on the likes of SF until the
relevant avenues are explored.
Personally, where the BBC's copyright may be unknowingly infringed, I'd
rather a constructive analysis of the tool(s) involved rather than
dialling R for Rumpole.
Before everyone gets too wound up, I think we should remember that the
BBC as a whole is a much calmer and more rational beast than Mr Loosemore.
When I first wrote the
http://www.whitelabel.org/2004/10/04/dont-get-me-wrong-i-really-like-bbc-news-online
I was terrified they were going to sue me. I know that Tom was baying
for me to be hung out to dry, but voices of reason prevailed, and I'm
still here. So I'm sure it'll all work out in the wash.
stef
(actually if you examine the headers on Tom's mail more closely, you may
find that there's more to it than meets the eye)
--
/*
Stefan Magdalinski
+447769 666528 (phone)
smagdali (IM/flickr/skype/etc)
*/
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
