binary restrictions?

[Karsten M. Self]

on Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 10:34:30AM +0200, Steve Lhomme (steve.lhomme at free.fr) wrote:
> Quoting "Karsten M. Self" <kmself at ix.netcom.com>:
> 
> > Because compiled works are less favorable for modifications.
> > They're not the "best form" of a work.  Specifically, they're not
> > the "preferred for for making modifications" to the work.  Better to
> > go with the source form than the compiled form, where appropriate.
> > Likewise proscriptions against obfuscated or machine-generated
> > sources.
> > 
> > This is consistent with traditions of copyright filing with the US
> > Library of Congress, which identifies "best works" and preferred
> > forms for making filings.

> And what about other countries ? Is it as "worldwide" as the copyright
> rights ?

The issue isn't law, it's policy.

Compiled works are derived under US copyright law, which is highly
normalized regards international law.

I'm citing an example of supporting policy with the LoC's registration
requirements.  You'll find these circulars at:  

    http://www.loc.gov/copyright/circs/

I'd suggest you read those pertaining to registration, "best edition",
and derived works.

Peace.

-- 
Karsten M. Self <kmself at ix.netcom.com>        http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?              Home of the brave
  http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/                    Land of the free
   Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA!  http://www.freesklyarov.org
Geek for Hire                      http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html
-------------- 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/20011008/5c737aac/attachment.sig>