On 2006-05-13, Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Merijn de Weerd wrote: >> My reply is an original work of authorship. I provided >> annotations and other modifications to the message I replied >> to. Therefore my reply is and only can be a derivative work. > > You simply don't grok it.
That's nice. Now provide an argument why, please. > This is a derivative (annotated) work: True, adding inline annotations produces a derivative work. Why is a series of citations followed by annotations or responses not derivative? It's a critique, not a rewrite, but it does incorporate parts of a preexisting work into a new work. I don't think there's a single judge who would consider the style of quoting (inline [] versus ">"-based quoting) at all relevant. Merijn -- Remove +nospam to reply _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
