On Sun, 2 Sep 2007, Gregg Reynolds wrote:
Yes. For the dimwits pontificating on this useless thread who can't be bothered to check facts on their own, here's the relevant text (http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html):
And therein lies the problem. Unless a developer went through a university program that requires courses in contract and copyright law or worked in a company whose corporate counsel actively educated engineers in that law or the developer took the initiative to learn on his own, he almost certainly doesn't know what he's talking about. Dorm room debates and shrill, puerile diatribes carry no legal weight. So try a self examination. Have you been through at least one of the three sources above and did it stick? If not, you might want to broaden your education a bit before ranting away and becoming a poster boy for why geeks *should* be beaten up on playgrounds. (One inexpensive source is Nolo Press and their legal self-help books.) This will be especially critical for OSS development given the pool from which developers self-select. Students who live in bubbles of unreality where they aren't held to account for their actions. Individuals unfamiliar with the language and laws of the country whose copyright law is in force. Those with political agendas who'll eventually damage their own cause with careless or intentional disregard for the issues. While "SCO vs Novell" looks like the last act of the desperate, the surface argument is still valid. Someone from the above list is eventually going to do something particularly stupid and "we're sorry" isn't going to be accepted as compensation. The tools for rapidly identifying theft and misattribution are now available so obscurity isn't going to save you. So, gosh, I hope those promises of indem- nification from companies with a few million in annual revenue hold up. Finally, for fun, here's a hypothetical to try out your newly acquired knowledge. Hypothesis: The fundamental function of the preprocessor (in C, C++, etc.) is to create derived works. Two major functions are to attach a work, in whole, to another work and to replace parts of one work with parts from another. The derived work is then further processed and eventually becomes "the program" which is distributed to customers. Fact: A number of Linux distributions (ref: RH 7.x) came (and perhaps still do) with header files with GPL2 licences. These header files are used in the compilation of some software which may then be sold to customers. Question: Does the GPL2 attach to any such software sold to customers? -- Monty Brandenberg, Software Consultant MCB, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] P.O. Box 426188 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cambridge, MA 02142-0021 617.864.6907
