On Tue, 2013-09-10 at 14:18 +0100, Jon Ribbens wrote: > On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 07:53:26PM +0100, Russel Winder wrote: > > Sadly, although it would be nice to have a file that says it applies to > > all files and so be very DRY, this will not work in UK and USA law, > > possibly also other jurisdictions. > > Do you have a reference for this? As far as I am aware, that statement > is simply wrong. Legally speaking, theoretically none of the computer > files comprising a program require any sort of copyright statement or > licence information whatsoever. The licence could be a completely > separate thing, for example a piece of physical paper.
I am not aware of any authority that puts this in case law, so you are right to point out that I am intimating something that is not actually law. However neither am I explicitly wrong. But IANAL so you may know of authorities which make me wrong on this. You are correct that the author of any literary work has moral rights in that work. The copyright always rests with the original author unless explicitly assigned. However in the cases I have been involved with, barristers have chosen not to make any copyright arguments over source files where there was no explicit statement of copyright in the original file. Other issues yes, but not ones of copyright. My comment perhaps implied more that it should, but is founded in pragmatics. -- Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.win...@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ python-uk mailing list python-uk@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
