Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!ukc!acorn!moncam!emmo
From: emmo@moncam.co.uk (Dave Emmerson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Copyright
Summary: Messy
Message-ID: <365@marvin.moncam.co.uk>
Date: 15 Jan 90 19:32:13 GMT
References: <6107@sdcc6.ucsd.edu>
Organization: Monotype ADG, Cambridge, UK
Lines: 35

In article <6107@sdcc6.ucsd.edu>, ir230@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (john wavrik) writes:
> 
> Regarding copyrights I've heard something bizarre:
> 
>     Suppose A writes a program which he does not intend to copyright
>        but instead makes it freely available.
> 
>     Suppose B takes some or all of A's program, incorporates it in his
>        work and puts *his* copyright on the whole thing.
> 
A solicitor friend says :

(assuming no copyright notice was included)
In the UK, if not elsewhere, A would only be able to insist that no
charge was made for the portion of his programme which was incorporated.

If it were shown to be essentially A's programme, B would only be able
to charge for distribution, but *how much* s/he can charge for that is
not a matter for the court, sorry. B is also free to charge whatever
s/he chooses for their own contribution if it is shown to be the
significant portion.

Unless A claimed copyright, s/he has effectively nothing to gain, but
if A can prove his/her version preceded B's, A could probably distribute
an enhanced freeware version of their own work with impunity........
(WITH a copyright notice this time)

It is quite possible to both claim copyright, and allow free distribution
upon condition that the conditions be transferred with the property - see
the headers in many comp.sources postings. 

Unfortunately, the law cares little for morals or ethics, particularly
if you're not in the megabuck income bracket (my comment this time).

Dave.