On Fri, 01 Apr 2005, M�ns Rullg�rd wrote: > You are obviously convinced that using a command line interface > can't be protected by copyright. Why, then, are you so persistent in > insisting that other interfaces somehow are awarded such protection?
Whether or not a specific interface is covered by copyright is necessarily jurisdictionally dependent. A conservative tack is to assume that if there's any creative component at all, then there is a possibility of copyright. [Even that may not go far enough, as some things that are devoid of creativity may have the protection of copyright in specific localities, cf. the database directive.] If you wish to say that there is no copyright protection for a specific instance in a specific jurisdiction, that may indeed be the case,[1] but it's quite irresponsible to claim that it is so for all jurisdictions. Don Armstrong 1: If it is so, I'd strongly suggest finding relevant case law or talking to a lawyer before using this to take actions which would be infringing if a copyright actually did exist. -- Quite the contrary; they *love* collateral damage. If they can make you miserable enough, maybe you'll stop using email entirely. Once enough people do that, then there'll be no legitimate reason left for anyone to run an SMTP server, and the spam problem will be solved. -- Craig Dickson in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
