Raul Miller writes: > On 5/12/05, Humberto Massa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> You inverted the "do more" and "do less". Publishing an arbitrary set of >> anthologies is "do more" as compared to publishing one story. > > Ok, here's my current understanding: permission to distribute sources > does not constitute permission to distribute binaries. The principle > under Brazilian law seems to be that restrictions on distribution of > sources automatically apply to binaries.
What underlies your understanding? Derivative works under copyright law requires that part of the change from the original be creative in nature, although the standard for "creative" is pretty low. See, for example, http://www.chillingeffects.org/derivative/faq.cgi#QID382 . Courts have traditionally held that a machine's operation -- such as compilation -- is not creative. A distribution's package may have enough changes or elaborations to qualify as a derivative work, but that is different from the specific case you mention. Michael Poole -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
