Re: (c) Copyright Question
----- Original Message -----
>From: Hayden McKay
>Subject: (c) Copyright Question
>
>
>
>I have noticed that alot of code and libraries bare the copyright logo.
>
>To my knowledge, in 99% of countries, under 'circular 61' (Computer programs)
>of the 1976 Copyright Act. Copyright protection is NOT available for ideas,
> program logic, algorithms, systems, methods, concepts, layouts, desighn,
> physical form, functions, structure, organization, format etc....
>
>So my question is; how are theese peices of code legaly copyright?
>Or did the author of the code just decietfuly put the (c) logo there?
>
>n.b. I'm talking about functions, algorythms etc... NOT a compliled computer
>program.
Copyright is automatic. There is no need to explictly place the (C) symbol in/on
a written work. It is done merely as a reminder to others that they do NOT have
the right to claim authorship or use the work (or substantial parts) for purposes
not approved by the author.
Copyright applies to works of art, music, photographs, and written works. What
is being copyrighted is the expression of an idea and not the idea itself. Many
people confuse copyrights and patents. Patents are used to protect NEW devices,
and in this context a compiled (or executable) program is a device. The
algorithms used in the device are not patented or copyrighted. But if a program
that uses a specific algorithm is patented, you cannot create antother program
that implements the algorithm without the patent owner's permission.
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>For example lets asume peices of 'code' can be copyright
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can assume this because they are. Written code is automatically copyrighted.
>If a 'so called' copyright function uses a Microsft Windows *.dll, then
>under the same conditions the *.dll functions would be copyright to
>Microsoft and the author of the 'so called' copyright function has 'no right'
> to use the *.dll in his function and claim copyright for himself.
The .DLL file is not copyrighted but the source code that produced it is.
Normally, people who use a .DLL are just using the compiled (executable) version
of the dll which is not copyrighted. You have no argument here.
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>n.b My personal thoughts about copyright.
>
>1) After turning the word copyright upsidown, you dont really get anyware.
> So if you bring the word copyright back to 40 cents then that means that
> 'no one' (on this planet) has the right to do 'anything'. We all know
>that this is not the case.
I have no idea what you are talking about. The paragraph above does not make any
sense to me at all.
>2) Ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of copyright and the court.
True.
>What are your views on copyright?
Every author should be protected from people who take the authors' works and use
them as if they were their own.
--
Derek
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
