4 ms·

Also: should the developers be in violation? I imagine it's a little like (sorry) kiddie porn, where, even if you're the kiddie, society doesn't want you suppor

by gosu 14y ago

Also: should the developers be in violation? I imagine it's a little like (sorry) kiddie porn, where, even if you're the kiddie, society doesn't want you supporting a community that it considers to be negative.

rodly 14y ago
I believe he means the developers are releasing their software for torrent in a trial or easter egg form.
derleth 14y ago
> should the developers be in violation? Legally? No, copyright law doesn't work that way. The people who own the copyright to a given work have an absolute right to give away the rights copyright law gives them, to conditionally give them away, to sell them, or to share them with others. Morally? Of course not. We must fight tooth and nail to prevent copyright laws from becoming that insane.
- einhverfr 14y ago
  Depending on jurisdiction, though. In some jurisdiction authors cannot give up some rights, such as the right to attribution, in theory at least. In practice, what are they going to do? Ban publishing things anonymously on the basis you are violating your own moral rights?
  - derleth 14y ago
    > Depending on jurisdiction, though. In some jurisdiction authors cannot give up some rights, such as the right to attribution, in theory at least. Entirely correct. My post was based on American copyright law, which has no concept of moral rights.
    - pbhjpbhj 14y ago
      Well USA are signatories to Berne Convent (http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ShowResults.jsp?treaty_id=15 http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ShowResults.jsp?treaty_id=15) which includes moral rights in Article 6bis. FWIW TRIPs includes an element of moral rights in Art.s 13/14 but specifically disclaims the inclusion of every right in Berne Art.6. It would be interesting to know why the US dont want to allow people the right to be named as author of their own work? (and if they led the exclusion in TRIPs).
      - derleth 14y ago
        > It would be interesting to know why the US dont want to allow people the right to be named as author of their own work? You can have that right if you negotiate for it in a contract or make it a condition of the license you release the work under. The more interesting question is why other countries want there to be rights granted by law that authors cannot give up.
        pbhjpbhj 14y ago
        Is that a French thing - IP rights that can't be given up? Moral rights to me are embodied in the right to be named as author of your works. And I can't see why you'd want to allow that to be taken away, eg in a contract of work, against the authors wishes. Where's the benefit in stimulating creative expression or for the public domain? Generally USA has rights that can't be given up; though you can chose not to exercise some of them. For example you can't sell yourself in to slavery AFAICT (or at least it wouldn't be lawful to be bought which in practical terms is equivalent).

by gosu 14y ago

rodly 14y ago

I believe he means the developers are releasing their software for torrent in a trial or easter egg form.

derleth 14y ago

> should the developers be in violation? Legally? No, copyright law doesn't work that way. The people who own the copyright to a given work have an absolute right to give away the rights copyright law gives them, to conditionally give them away, to sell them, or to share them with others. Morally? Of course not. We must fight tooth and nail to prevent copyright laws from becoming that insane.

einhverfr 14y ago
Depending on jurisdiction, though. In some jurisdiction authors cannot give up some rights, such as the right to attribution, in theory at least. In practice, what are they going to do? Ban publishing things anonymously on the basis you are violating your own moral rights?
- derleth 14y ago
  > Depending on jurisdiction, though. In some jurisdiction authors cannot give up some rights, such as the right to attribution, in theory at least. Entirely correct. My post was based on American copyright law, which has no concept of moral rights.
  - pbhjpbhj 14y ago
    Well USA are signatories to Berne Convent (http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ShowResults.jsp?treaty_id=15 http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ShowResults.jsp?treaty_id=15) which includes moral rights in Article 6bis. FWIW TRIPs includes an element of moral rights in Art.s 13/14 but specifically disclaims the inclusion of every right in Berne Art.6. It would be interesting to know why the US dont want to allow people the right to be named as author of their own work? (and if they led the exclusion in TRIPs).
    - derleth 14y ago
      > It would be interesting to know why the US dont want to allow people the right to be named as author of their own work? You can have that right if you negotiate for it in a contract or make it a condition of the license you release the work under. The more interesting question is why other countries want there to be rights granted by law that authors cannot give up.
      - pbhjpbhj 14y ago
        Is that a French thing - IP rights that can't be given up? Moral rights to me are embodied in the right to be named as author of your works. And I can't see why you'd want to allow that to be taken away, eg in a contract of work, against the authors wishes. Where's the benefit in stimulating creative expression or for the public domain? Generally USA has rights that can't be given up; though you can chose not to exercise some of them. For example you can't sell yourself in to slavery AFAICT (or at least it wouldn't be lawful to be bought which in practical terms is equivalent).