On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:26:55 +0100, you wrote:
>2009/9/16 Stephen Jolly <[email protected]>
>
>>
>> On 16 Sep 2009, at 18:53, Tim Dobson wrote:
>>
>>> What do people think?
>>>
>>
>> Reminds me of when some of the Windows 2000 code was leaked - if anything
>> the leak was worse than useless, since the open-source projects that could
>> have benefited from it obviously couldn't look at it without becoming
>> copyright infringers, and the people behind legitimate reverse-engineering
>> efforts always had to be looking out for suspicious contributions from
>> well-meaning idiots.
>>
>
>It's nothing like that. Source code is source code, you can reverse
>engineer it. This file is a CSV file, with a helpful first row of column
>names.
>
Just because this is a zipped up csv file rather than a "database" does not
seem to exempt it from "Database Right"
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1997/19973032.htm
Where a database is defined as:
" Databases
3A. - (1) In this Part "database" means a collection of independent
works, data or other materials which -
(a) are arranged in a systematic or methodical way, and
(b) are individually accessible by electronic or other means.
(2) For the purposes of this Part a literary work consisting of a database
is original if, and only if, by reason of
the selection or arrangement of the contents of the database the database
constitutes the author's own intellectual
creation.".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right
--
Rgds
Paul Webster
-
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]/
