Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site masscomp.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!masscomp!z
From: z@masscomp.UUCP (Steve Zimmerman)
Newsgroups: net.emacs
Subject: Re: Gnu Emacs & Copyright Laws
Message-ID: <736@masscomp.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 19-Jul-85 09:16:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: masscomp.736
Posted: Fri Jul 19 09:16:27 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 20-Jul-85 05:48:15 EDT
References: <2432@pegasus.UUCP>
Organization: Masscomp - Westford, MA
Lines: 39

> Also, use of generic functions does not necessarily constitute copyright
> violation or preclude copyrighting.

Although the second part of this statement is true, I think you're
making some false assumptions in the first part.  As supporting
evidence, you quote:

> [To what extent does the deposited program contain preexisting
> materials?  Your application implies ...] "... that the program
> is entirely new and contains no SUBSTANTIAL (my emphasis) amount of
> material that has been previously registered or published or that
> has become standard usage for certain purposes.  Although some
> programmers create from scratch all parts of their programs, we
> understand that many draw from libraries or previously developed
> programs or routines in creating a new program." [1]

This certainly corresponds to my understanding of the copyright law.
However, if you read it (and the copyright law itself) carefully, it is
clear that this is merely stating the eligibility requirements for
copyrighting a program.  That is, a program must be substantially
original in order to be eligible for copyright, but use of library
routines and similar programs (which may or may not be copyrighted) does
not necessarily detract from that originality.  I think a close reading
of these texts will show that they do not say that it is all right to
use copyrighted subroutines or similar code in a new program without
permission, and that the proper use of such code implies that permission
has been received.

I liked your example of the invalid copyright notice.  The problem, of
course, is that the international copyright symbol is a C with a circle
around it, and the parentheses don't quite qualify.  Adding the word
"Copyright" is sufficient protection under U.S. law.  However, this word
does not satisfy international copyright law, which accepts only the
circle C.  This leads to the interesting situation that there is no way
no put an internationally valid copyright notice into an ASCII source
file.

	Steve Zimmerman
	Masscomp