On 7/25/05, Stéphane Zuckerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 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 <http://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]
>
> The idea that someone has "ownership" of code anyway (legalisms aside) is
somewhat megalomaniacal. I don't think anyone can code even a single line of
code without benefiting from someone else's work. Should we comment credit
to the GOF every time we apply a design pattern? Should we ask for
permission every time we google our way through a problem and integrate the
code (yes, even using copy/paste) into our package, then distribute it to
the public? Should we research every passage of code to make sure someone
else hasn't done it first (I guarantee that almost everything has been done
before).
This idea that "you sole my (his/her) code" only applies when the code was
literally stolen: forcefully or covertly taken. IMO, if MJ wants to
copy/paste code from fifty sites (and I'm not accusing him of doing so) and
compile them in to something that works well and benefits the community,
he's welcome.
