Qt/Embedded

[kmself at ix.netcom.com]

on Fri, Nov 17, 2000 at 10:44:39PM -0800, David Johnson (david at usermode.org) wrote:
> On Friday 17 November 2000 09:41 pm, kmself at ix.netcom.com wrote:
> 

> > > The legal test of copyrightability (what is copyrightable) is
> > > "original works of authorship, fixed in a tangible medium" [1].
> > > Or at least the second part of that.
> >
> > > This seems to be a different issue. Those are good attributes for
> > > what can be copyrighted. But it doesn't follow that they are
> > > necessarily the same attributes for what can be regulated by the
> > > copyright holder.  One specific example is a movie. The author can
> > > restrict how a movie is shown, even if it is displayed fleetingly
> > > on a movie screen, failing the "fixed" attribute.
> >
> > Film and video qualify.  Performance is an exlusive right.
> 
> Okay, what am I missing here. Something is not following...
> 
> First you say that the copyright holder can restrict software in RAM
> because it is "fixed in a tangible medium". But you referenced a
> phrase that seems to apply to "copyrightability". So I questioned this
> by giving the example of film and video "display", which in not fixed
> in a tangible medium (the celluloid is, the transient images of light
> are not).

Copyright in film is conveyed by fixation in celluloid, video, digital,
or other form.  The film is protected by copyright.  One of the
exclusive rights under US law is that of public performance.

Read the law, I'm not going to explain it to you paragraph by paragraph.

> Then you switch over to performance! 

No, you switched to movies.  I responded, briefly, identifying the
missing links of your argument.

> Perhaps I don't understand the word "copyrightability". I assumes it
> to mean "a work that can be copyrighted."

See the reference two posts prior to the US Library of Congress Circular
on copyright, including a discussion of what is copyrightable.

> So, apropos to the original question: does the GPL restrict dynamic
> linkage because it makes a derivitive work in the user's RAM? (the
> electrical states in a RAM chip being classified as "fixed in a
> tangible medium") Or does it restrict dynamic linkage because it is a
> performance? Or does it restrict it because the user has entered into
> an agreement with the author (which would be binding regardless of
> copyright law)?

Derivative work in RAM, with, as I understand, an argument of
"contributory infringement"  being made for works which are distributed
as object plus libraries.  I'd be more comfortable hearing from the
lawyers here (Larry, you awake?).


-- 
Karsten M. Self <kmself at ix.netcom.com>     http://www.netcom.com/~kmself
 Evangelist, Zelerate, Inc.                      http://www.zelerate.org
  What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?      There is no K5 cabal
   http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/        http://www.kuro5hin.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20001118/edc1eba2/attachment.sig>