In gnu.misc.discuss Hyman Rosen <[email protected]> wrote: > Alan Mackenzie wrote: > > Does copyright law have any notion of "a complete program"? ;-)
> No. Copyright law has the notion of a collective work, which is > <http://www.copyright.gov/title17/circ92.pdf> > a work, such as a periodical issue, anthology, or encyclopedia, > in which a number of contributions, constituting separate and > independent works in themselves, are assembled into a collective > whole. Ah, it's context-snipping time, is it? Let me put the context back again for you: [Hyman Rosen]: >> "Mere aggregation" is the placing of multiple separate programs onto a >> single medium for convenience in distribution. It is not the linking >> together of multiple components into a single binary file to form a >> complete program. In the above paragraph, you have used the notion of a "complete program" to distinguish it from a "mere aggregation". I agree with you here. Yet a bit higher up, you answered "No" to the legal existence of a "complete program". You seem to be being inconsistent, here. Would you care to resolve this inconsistency? Does copyright law recognise the concept of a "complete program" or doesn't it, or is it a bit squidgy? -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany). _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
