Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > You must be reading something that isn't there. The "independent" > status of the new copyright with respect to preexisting copyright(s) > in the sense that it "does not affect or enlarge the scope, duration, > ownership, or subsistence of, any copyright protection in the > preexisting material" is the same in both cases.
All I'm reading is that in both cases a new copyright exists, contrary to your statement: > A non-derivative compilation (i.e. "not based" in the > derivative sense under copyright law on some other compilation) have > its own its own copyright statements, not derivative works. I think I'm getting past the "expose fallacies for the benefit of newcomers" stage and getting into a "feeding the troll" stage. You won't read much more of me in this thread. _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
