On Wed, 30 May 2007 13:51:34 -0500 rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So what is creative and original about copycatting the functionality > of other Unix shells?
The way in which it is done. Most novels deal with relationships between people, but that doesn't mean that they cannot be covered by copyright. And in any case, copyright is not about the ideas, but about the specific expression of those ideas. You can write a POSIX compliant shell that shares not one line of code with another POSIX compliant shell. You can write a C++ compiler that is structurally completely different from another C++ compiler, and there will be little doubt that both are protected by copyright. In the case of drivers, that must call specific routines in the OS and perform specific hardware manipulations, two implementations might be so close to each other as to be indistinguishable, in which case their would be no way to claim copyright infringement (unless, I suppose, there is hard evidence that one of the parties did indeed copy the code of the other). Most (business) programs implement some kind of standard (or pre-defined process). Surely you don't want to suggest that Payroll programs cannot be copyrighted? -- Stefaan A Eeckels -- Life itself is a misery and nobody can tell what can be of it. Those that can tell what can be of it are those who cannot tell us because they are far from us (dead). -- Very profound scam _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
