[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Linux-aus] Meaning of object code/binary format/executable format in GPL/BSD style licenses



On 9/20/06, Benno <benjl@cse.unsw.edu.au> wrote:
On Wed Sep 20, 2006 at 16:58:05 +1000, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>I think it is a different representation of the original code and
>probably not covered by the GPL.
>
>Say, your code is licensed under the GPL and written in C. Then
>somebody ports that to python. What license would you expect to have
>to represent it under? Is there something in the GPL that covers this
>situation? I don't know, but my gut feeling no. But IANL either. :)

Mmm good question. Also I don't know if it makes a difference if it is
a person, or a machine. E.g: If I have a program that converts C ->
Python would that make a difference?

I believe that under copyright law to be a separate copyrighted work requires that it be creative. Therefore, manually translating it can be considered creative (it's actually reimplementing the same algorithm (which cannot be copyrighted) in a different language), where as a machine translation is not creative and is therefore considered not copyrightable making it a derived work as it is based on an already copyrighter work.

IANAL...

andrew


It seems dangerous, lets define a language C', which is like C but a little different, then have a program that automatically changes C -> C', can I now get the whole corpus for free? I doubt it.

Cheers,

Benno

_______________________________________________
linux-aus mailing list
linux-aus@lists.linux.org.au
http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/linux-aus



--
Andrew Donnellan
http://andrewdonnellan.com
http://ajdlinux.blogspot.com
Jabber - ajdlinux@jabber.org.au
GPG - hkp://subkeys.pgp.net 0x5D4C0C58
-------------------------------
Member of Linux Australia - http://linux.org.au
Debian user - http://debian.org
Get free rewards - http://ezyrewards.com/?id=23484
OpenNIC user - http://www.opennic.unrated.net