Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utcsrgv.UUCP Path: utzoo!utcsrgv!info-mac From: info-mac@utcsrgv.UUCP (info-mac) Newsgroups: ont.micro.mac Subject: Unix sources -- hangman --> licensed Unix source code? Message-ID: <4728@utcsrgv.UUCP> Date: Wed, 4-Jul-84 01:10:10 EDT Article-I.D.: utcsrgv.4728 Posted: Wed Jul 4 01:10:10 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 4-Jul-84 02:29:36 EDT Sender: peterr@utcsrgv.UUCP Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto Lines: 29 Date: 3 July 1984 03:43-EDT From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: Unix sources -- hangman --> licensed Unix source code? To: vortex!lauren@RAND-UNIX Cc: INFO-MAC@SUMEX-AIM In-Reply-To: Msg of Sat 30-Jun-84 04:35:14 PDT from Lauren Weinstein Do you not go too far in your generalization? I would imagine that just how much of what can be restricted how depends on what law one relies on for protection. After teh Franklin/APple case it's likely that courts will hold that object code as well as sources are protected by copyright; but copyright has got some severe restrictions and limits built right into the law. License law can't be applied to innocent use by third parties. Posession of copyrighted materials can be ambiguous. The whole matter is unsettled. Agreed, one is best off being careful; but "contains materials which were part of licensed software" may be a bit broad. Just what is subject to copyright in computer code? We haven't really settled that in literary law, although we do have some cases; in softare and computer code it is considerably more ambiguous. How many lines must be identical? If not identical, but accomplish the same thing, how many points of similarity constitute infringement? (IE using the same code but putting results in different registers and different memory locations would probably be an infringement...) OH Well. It will make a great column think piece.