Short answer: No in most cases. You can't create confusion and then sue people over the confusion. This is the purpose of copyright notice - you have to make i

Short answer: No in most cases. You can't create confusion and then sue people over the confusion. This is the purpose of copyright notice - you have to make it clear enough who owns rights to avoid various defenses. As for your function question: Copyright was created mostly for books, remember. As such, it gets weird quickly when applied to code. For example - i write a book, and on page 236, it says at the top "the text of this page is copied from the folowing book <some book>" and then copies it inline. This is probably infringement. If i instead write a book, and on page 236, it says at the top "for the text of this page, please see page 194 of the following book <some book>" and does not copy it inline. This is not infringement. Now, could you currently convince a judge how shared library vs static library linking works, and that it matters? Maybe. Moreso than you could a decade ago.