4 ms·
This is a great line from a Wired article on hardware copyright and copyleft: In the US, copyright does not cover the functional aspects that the design descri
by 1cvmask 6y ago
This is a great line from a Wired article on hardware copyright and copyleft:
In the US, copyright does not cover the functional aspects that the design describes, but does cover decorative aspects. When one object has decorative aspects and functional aspects, you get into tricky ground (*).
https://www.wired.com/2015/03/richard-stallman-how-to-make-hardware-designs-free/ https://www.wired.com/2015/03/richard-stallman-how-to-make-h...
- Iv 6y agoIn France that's the same for software. I had not realized that until my lab made me sign a very specific copyright sale contract. Mathematical formulas are considered unpatentable and uncopyrightable and legally, programs have been recognized to be equivalent to mathematical formulas. So only the formatting, variable name, decoration of code is the ground for copyright. My understanding is that if you were to run the code through an obfuscator, the result would be free of copyrightable items. To my despair I never found anyone playful enough to help me explore how solid this reasoning was.
- tzs 6y agoBy that argument, running copyrighted code through a compiler would produce a binary that is not copyrighted.
- barbegal 6y agoHere's an article discussing that argument http://freesoftwaremagazine.com/articles/what_if_copyright_didnt_apply_binary_executables/ http://freesoftwaremagazine.com/articles/what_if_copyright_d...
- Iv 6y agoIn France I believe this may very well have been the case. But I would not be surprised if they plugged that hole with recent laws. Somehow, I believe piracy is prosecuted under counterfeiting laws there.