Craig McClanahan a écrit :
On 7/21/05, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This code does not belong to Michael. It is purloined from
www.michaelmcgrady.com and other discussion on this list.
In the midst of chuckling at the assertions made in this thread, a
serious comment for DJ (and others like him) to consider. Publishing
source code on a public web site, without any associated license, as
was done here, is basically putting that code into the public doman.
If you want to assert ownership rights, you might think about a
different behavior.
Mmmh. Not always - at least, not in French right, for instance. If there
is no license tied to code on a web site, but said code is clearly
defined as Mr X's code, then it is implicit that you don't have the
right to use it, integrate it, etc. for whatever purpose unless you have
some written (1) authorization from Mr X.
If you use the code for your personal needs and don't publish the code
or try to make money with a derivative from it, what I've just said
doesn't apply, of course.
Now there is always the matter of "common sense", which would have us
think that since the code is available for free, without anything
written about using it, then it should be alright to reuse it. Most of
the time, this assertion is correct. Sometimes it is not (just think of
the "GIF problem" a few years ago - I know, this isn't the same kind of
problem, but it is related in some way).
(1) : well, "written", or at least "perfectly non-ambiguous".
--
Stéphane Zuckerman
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
