Hyman Rosen wrote: > > Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > Well, the High-on-Crack Court is of opinion that replacing OS bootloader > > constitutes creation of a derivative work that needs permission from OS' > > copyright owner because "[w]ithout a bootloader, Mac OS X would not > > operate." Do you share that absurd 'legal' reasoning, dear Hyman? > > The court referred to precedent in D&B v. Grace. Think of it > as a book - if someone takes a book and prepares a new one by > replacing some chapters of it with chapters of his own, is the > result a derivative work?
It's more like replacing one foreword with another foreword, silly. The replacement doesn't constitute a derivative work of a book unless foreword contains protected expression taken from book. regards, alexander. -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
