Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 11:10:11AM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote: >> Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > On Mon, 20 Dec 2004, Josh Triplett wrote: >> > >> >> >>This is much broader. For example, I cannot write a derivative called >> >> >>"Brian's Xdebug" or "Xdebug manual" or even "A third-party manual for >> >> >>Xdebug". >> >> > >> >> > The manual is no problem, that's not a derived product. >> >> >> >> It could very well be a derivative; a manual might want to copy some of >> >> the code for illustrative purposes, or copy various comments. >> > >> > IMO just copying a tiny bit of code or copying various comments does not >> > make something a derivate. I mean, com'on, other people can come up with >> > those same comments or tiny bits of code. >> >> This seems to me to be no different from citing a paragraph from a >> book, which is perfectly legal under normal copyright law. > > There is no such thing as "normal copyright law". Not all jurisdictions out > there have any concept of what is known commonly as "fair use", which is the > only thing I can think of that would allow you to quote a paragraph from a > copyrighted book without the copyright holder's permission.
You're right. >> If a code fragment is used in another program, matters might be >> different, though. > > Why? Quoting from a book is often done to illustrate something, or otherwise give an example. I can't see how a code fragment could be considered an example of something, if it is actually executed as part of a program. -- Måns Rullgård [EMAIL PROTECTED]