Copyrighting facts (was: Re: Can you alter the MIT license?)

[InfoNuovo at cs.com]

There's a great deal of information about copyright and copyrightable
subject matter available from the Library of Congress Office of Copyright.
It is probably all on the web too.

I think, for this conversation, the key thing that applies, in the area of
literary works (which software once fell into, but I haven't kept track of
recent revisions), is that copyright applies to original expression.  In
fact, if two people actually arrive, via independent original expression, at
the same statement, there is no violation (unlike the case with patents).

There is plenty of written matter that is not copyrightable.  It is not your
copyrightable subject matter if it is not your original expression (and
people who make derivative works should pay attention specifically to that
aspect -- you can't extend the reach of your copyright beyond the part that
is your original expression, no matter what the copyright status of your
sources).  Also, a lot of a copyrighted work might simply not be
copyrightable subject matter, and that part stays that way.  One case of
that is utilitarian necessity.  In utilitarian necessity there is no room
for originality as a practial matter, so to allow copyright would be
inappropriate.  That is, some ideas have limited ways to be expressed in
order to achieve their practical purposes.

There is something else very useful for us literalist logicist types to
remember -- "the law does not concern itself with trifles."   I realize it
might seem otherwise, and I suggest this is still something very valuable to
keep in mind.

-- Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Seth David Schoen [mailto:schoen at cty-alum.org]
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 1999 13:52
To: license-discuss at opensource.org
Subject: Copyrighting facts (was: Re: Can you alter the MIT license?)