Re: License issue on tiny Javascript fragment

[Wesley J. Landaker]

On Saturday 07 February 2009 06:21:55 Colin Turner wrote:
 ... the code is so astonishingly trivial ...

Given this, why not just take 10 minutes and reimplement it? 

-- 
Wesley J. Landaker w...@icecavern.net xmpp:w...@icecavern.net
OpenPGP FP: 4135 2A3B 4726 ACC5 9094  0097 F0A9 8A4C 4CD6 E3D2


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: License issue on tiny Javascript fragment

[Joe Smith]

Colin Turner c...@piglets.com wrote in message 
news:498d8af3.7030...@piglets.com...

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Hi All,

I hope you can help and advise on this issue. I am packaging a web
application for Debian, I am also the principal upstream author. The
code is generally GPL v2 PHP. Over the years the project inherited, from
a side project, a small fragment of Javascript that has no explicit 
license.


The problem I have is that the code is, like so much JS, sitting
available, apparently for general consumption on several websites. I
have been unable to acquire a license from any of the authors (no reply
to emails) and the code is so astonishingly trivial it's hard to see how
it could possibly be re-implemented without it being the same code with
different variable names.

Any guidance on what I should do? The functionality the code provides
(counting and capping characters in textareas) is quite useful and
losing it would probably cause dataloss in use of the application.

CT.

Code follows...

// Use one function for multiple text areas on a page
// Limit the number of characters per textarea




Here, is a clean room implmentation of a drop-in compatible (same argument 
order) function that will do the job.


function functionName(textObject,sizeRemainingObject,maxSize)
{
textObject.value=textObject.value.substring(0,maxSize);
sizeRemainingObject.value=maxSize-textObject.value.length;
}

Compared to the above it works the same, except that the second parameter 
will always be updated, to the number of characters remaining. Seeing as 
this appears to be intended to limit the size of text input in a textarea, 
while visually displaying the number of characters left in something else, 
that should be fine.


(Yes I've checked, and substring does the right thing here).

This new version is the very definition of a function too trivial to 
copyright, even the variable names and whitespaceing are as non-creative as 
possible. (Although I would recomend reformatting the whitespace used to be 
more readable).


Use it and be happy.

Joe Smith 




--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: License issue on tiny Javascript fragment

[Ben Finney]

Joe Smith unknown_kev_...@hotmail.com writes:

 This new version is the very definition of a function too trivial to
 copyright

That's a pretty strong assertion. The “very definition of” as
defined where? Or what, exactly, are you claiming?

You also seem to be under the misapprehension that “to copyright” is
something that a creator does to a work. It's not. Instead, copyright
is an automatic monopoly granted *to* the creator; under the Berne
convention, nobody decides “to copyright” a work.

Or, more briefly: copyright long ago stopped being a verb, and is now
a noun. It's now more akin to a very insidious attribute that slithers
into just about any human intellectual work usually uninvited, and is
very difficult to eradicate completely from the work.

 even the variable names and whitespaceing are as non-creative as
 possible.

“Difficult to read” isn't the same thing as “non-creative”. On the
contrary; you have demonstrated that someone can creatively decide on
different creative expressions of the same work, to the extent that
you contrast your expression with one that differs in its uses of
variable names and whitespace.

Moreover, I'm not aware of a valid legal theory that use of variable
names or whitespace have any bearing on whether a particular work is
subject to copyright.


Given all that, I'd be very wary of taking the above quoted claims as
having any meaningful application.

-- 
 \ “On the other hand, you have different fingers.” —Steven Wright |
  `\   |
_o__)  |
Ben Finney


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org