> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 23:40
> The text of Bob's code is not cut and paste, it is not > plagerism, yada yada. It doesn't have to be Cut & Paste. Please see Micro Star v. FormGen: http://eon.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/DVD/cases/Micro_Star_v_Formgen.html > Copyright is limited to a specific stream of text. > Alice wrote: "it was a dark and stormy night" > Bob wrote: "rain fell after sunset" > Alice cannot copyright all text that has the same > meaning or functionality as her's, she can only > copyright the specific stream of text "it was a dark and > stormy night." It doesn't have to be a "specific stream of text". See "non-literal" copying in Altai v. CA (1992), as well as Micro Star v. FormGen. > You copyright a 2story colonial, > I copyright a garage intended to splice directly into your design. > > but no text, no diagrams, no drawings, nothing that is in your design > is in my design. The only thing we have in common is that our > interface is compatible. A user gets your blueprint for the house, > and my blueprint for the garage, and then uses them together > to build a house with an attached garage. > > I did not infringe on your copyright. Correct, because what you have described above, is a composition, not inheritance. > what you're effectively saying is: > > "But I don't want people to use my house design if they're going > to attach a garage to it." No, what I am saying is that I don't want people to change my design within the design boundaries (e.g. place a garage between living room and bedroom). Michael -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3