PS: How To Break The GPL - Direct Functionality versus Copyrighted Expression

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

Let me clear up some language in my last paragraph,

	I suggest being mindful that we are discussing
	copyrighted subject matter and not something else.
	When we entertain a thin-ice case (e.g., the alleged
	derivative nature of *dependent* works that don't involve
	alteration of the original in any way but depend on the
	function expressed), it is not prudent to head farther
	into the center of the lake for resolution.

How do people deal with this in traditional areas?  By carefully seeking
rights and permissions so that there is an agreement that a specific use is
completely authorized whether or not it is protected!  Practical agreements
are made to the effect that the cloud is dispersed.  The publishing industry
does not rely on "fair use" as a protection in anything but the most
clear-cut cases.  People obtain permissions (e.g., in quoting material,
reproducing code, etc., in textbooks).  when permissions are too difficult
or expensive to obtain, publishers employ employ substitutions or even
abandon/delay projects.

-- Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:infonuovo at email.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2000 07:54
To: Ken Arromdee; license-discuss at opensource.org
Subject: RE: How To Break The GPL - Direct Functionality versus
Copyrighted Expression


[ ... ]

I just want to suggest being mindful that we are talking about copyrighted
subject matter here and not other things.   When we are discussing a
thin-ice area (e.g., derivative works that don't involve alteration of the
original in any way but depend on the function expressed), it is not prudent
to head farther into the center of the lake for resolution.

-- Dennis

------------------
Dennis E. Hamilton
InfoNuovo
mailto:infonuovo at email.com
tel. +1-206-779-9430 (gsm)
fax. +1-425-793-0283
http://www.infonuovo.com