On Sat, 25 Sep 2004, Steve Underwood wrote: > >On Sat, 25 Sep 2004, Steve Underwood wrote: > >I am not a lawyer, nor even a US citizen. Talking to someone who is both > >may be a good idea. > > > > > What is the relevance of being a US citizen? Copyright rules are largely > global.
There are two different major sets of copyright laws, depending on which treaty they were derived from. They are not always compatible. They differ in such points as whether you can transfer your copyright or merely assign the rights granted by it. > >Unless otherwise granted by the copyright holder, by default the copyright > >of a derived work (in the copyright legan sense) is held by the owner of > >the original copyright and not the crator of the derived work. So no, the > >patches are owned by Intel as well. > > > > > But the patches aren't a derived work. That is the value they have here. > There are an independant adjunct work. According to most lawyers a patch _is_ a derived work in nearly all circumstances. E.g. a novel based on the characters from a novel by another author is a derived work. If you are producing copies of just about anything you really need to speak to your lawyer to be safe. The excpetion possibly being open source stuff based soley on open source stuff. Anyway, this is getting too far off topic for this list. Mea culpa. Peter _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users