Xref: utzoo misc.legal:4422 comp.sys.ibm.pc:13906 comp.sys.mac:14601 comp.sys.apple:5017 Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cca!dee From: dee@cca.CCA.COM (Donald Eastlake) Newsgroups: misc.legal,comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.apple Subject: Re: Windows/Mac Copyrights Message-ID: <26342@cca.CCA.COM> Date: 30 Mar 88 20:49:34 GMT References: <5480@well.UUCP> <4092@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> <1719@pasteur.Berkeley.Edu> <1454@csib.csi.UUCP> <7987@sol.ARPA> <4795@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU> <1457@csib.csi.UUCP> <337@dbase.UUCP> Reply-To: dee@CCA.CCA.COM.UUCP (Donald Eastlake) Organization: Computer Corp. of America, Cambridge, MA Lines: 65 In article <337@dbase.UUCP> tessler@dbase.UUCP (Steven Tessler) writes: >You can copyright the expression of an idea but not an idea. True. >For example, if program 'A' is a check book balancing program >and program 'B' is also a check book balancing program and both >programs "look and feel" similar but the source code is substantially >different then both programs are different expressions of a like idea. Not at all clear. What is "substantially" different. A different language and all different variable names but identical structure? A totally different structure and user interface? >Neither program 'A' or program 'B' is a copy of one another so how >could a copyright of program 'A' be infringed by program 'B'? The line between idea and express is by no means clear. First of all, a copyright protects you only against copying. (I think some of these messages are getting muddled up in trade mark, patent, and general unfair competition laws. So if, for example, you can't show that someone had access to your work, you generally can't get them for copyright infringement because you can't prove they copied it. But it does not have to be an exact bit for bit copy. Copyright also protect derivative works. So if they take a program of yours and translate it in a straightforward way to another computer language or CPU it would seem just the same as translating a novel into another human languate and you are protected. Since the whole idea is to ecourage creation by allowing authors to reap the fruits of their creativity, if you put a lot of effort into the organization of your code and data, why should you not be protected to the same extent that, for example "characters" like Superman or detailed plots are protected against someone who copies them just changing minor details? In fact, this now seems to be the case as there is a judgement on record where someone programmed a software package for a dental office in one language where they retained the copyright and licensed the use of the software. The office then totally re-coded it in BASIC and proceeded to sell it but with the same general menu sequences, flow of control, data organization, etc. Testimony showed that most of the effort in the creation of the package had been related to study of the problem, design, modification based on user feedback, etc., and relatively little effort on the coding itself. Also, there were many other ways the program could have been organized. The court held that the BASIC version was a derivative work in violation of the copyright. The "expression" included the organization of the program and the "idea", which could not be copyrighted, was the general idea of a dental office package and the general services it offered. Obviously, as with all intellectual property issues, there is a conflict between property and freedom and it is not clear where to draw the line but it seems to me that the cases which come to trial that I have heard about have been individually decided in a reasonable fashion. And the concept of "fair use" colntinues to provide breathing room. This is not to condone the way our legal system gives the party with the most resources so much clout. -- +1 617-969-9570 Donald E. Eastlake, III ARPA: dee@CCA.CCA.COM usenet: {cbosg,decvax,linus}!cca!dee P. O. Box N, MIT Branch P. O., Cambridge, MA 02139-0903 USA