Quoting Simon Hobson ([email protected]): > However, without a lot of work, doesn't the ability to link mean > pulling in some sort of interface file and "building in" that file to > your code ?
Much depends on the particulars of a specific case, but in general the code elements used for that purpose would tend to be adjudicated to be 'functional elements', which are not eligible for copyright coverage, as opposed ot 'expressive elements', which are. I don't have UK caselaw linked from my knowledgebase page posted upthread, but do have links to the leading USA cases, which you might find of interest. (Jurisprudence on this matter of course differs between countries, but tends to be generally similar on account of treaties.) > And I suppose that then brings up ... to what extent does reading the > interface description and then typing it out (rather than just "cp"ing > the file) constitute copying ? See above about the distinction between expressive and functional elements. That distinction is one of the main ways the law enforces the 'idea/expression dichotomy': The overarching rule is that useful ideas should be eligible for patent coverage if at all, but not copyright, and creative expressions should be eligible for copyright coverage if at all, and not patents. -- Cheers, "I know there is a joke to be made with the word Rick Moen asymptote, but I just can't seem to reach it." [email protected] -- @j_c_fitz McQ! (4x80) _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list [email protected] https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
