3 ms·
> The output of a machine simply does not qualify for copyright protection Wolfram disagrees, and he's got lawyers and money too. Whom do we believe? http://w
by jordigh 5y ago
> The output of a machine simply does not qualify for copyright protection
Wolfram disagrees, and he's got lawyers and money too. Whom do we believe?
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090518204959409 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090518204959409
- Mindwipe 5y agoWolfram is discussing American law, Reda European. (I'm still not sure I agree with Reda, but the point is at least arguable under European law and depends on the circumstances).
- jordigh 5y agoBut there's a Berne convention that kind of unifies copyright around the world, right? It's not like something can be copyrighted in one country but not another.
- Mindwipe 5y agoThe Berne convention sets down some basic principles, but there are an awful lot of edge cases and it is very much the case that things can be copyrighted in one country but not another. Heck, the duration of copyright isn't even uniform around the world.