hollaar@utah-cs.UUCP (01/01/70)
In article <18119@amdcad.AMD.COM> phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) writes: > ... but DEC can't even do a simple copyright. It reads >Copyright Company Date instead of Copyright Date Company. Actually, the Copyright Act of 1976 states in 17 USC 401: "(b) Form of Notice. -- The notice appearing on the copies shall consist of the following three elements: (1) the symbol ... (the letter C in a circle), or the word "Copyright" or the abbreviation "Copr."; and (2) the year of the first publication of the work; ... and (3) the name of the owner of the copyright ... (c) Position of Notice. -- ... The Register of Copyrights shall prescribe by regulation, as examples, specific methods for the affixation and positions of the notice on various types of works that will satisfy this requirement, but these specifications shall not be considered exhaustive." So, even though most people seem to mimic the form "copyright date company", the form "copyright company date" (or even "date company copyright") meets the requirements of the Copyright Act. >They also have that other common mistake: "(This software) is supplied >"As Is" without expressed or implied warranty", when I thought the >magic word was "express", not "expressed". (I got this impression from >reading the crypt man page. Anyone know which is correct?) Either form is correct, since what they are disclaiming is either an "express warranty" (a term used in the Uniform Commercial Code to mean a warranty based on the representations of the seller) or an "expressed warranty" (a warranty expressed, or given, by the seller). In the case of DEC, what they are saying is that they have not stated (or expressed) any warranties, and there are no implied warranties. Probably a better source for studying the laws concerning warranties would be the Uniform Commercial Code, or a text on contracts, not the documentation of a computer program. >You may think I'm a nit picker but lawyers are funny people. Best to pick nits when you know what you are discussing. I'm not a lawyer, but sometimes they are "funny" because the law requires very specific things (like the use of a "C in a circle" rather than "(c)"). (My wife IS a lawyer, though, and sometimes I do think she is funny.)
phil@amdcad.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai) (08/29/87)
In article <455@hscfvax.UUCP> mohamed@hscfvax.UUCP (750025@Mohamed_el_Lozy) writes: >The current 2.0 release of Ultrix also contains a gnuemacs tar file. >Since DEC lawyers are certainly careful they must have concluded >that it was safe to do so. I wouldn't go by that. The deqna driver included in 4.3 BSD (/sys/vaxif/if_qe.c) is licensed from DEC and is allegedly DEC property but DEC can't even do a simple copyright. It reads Copyright Company Date instead of Copyright Date Company. They also have that other common mistake: "(This software) is supplied "As Is" without expressed or implied warranty", when I thought the magic word was "express", not "expressed". (I got this impression from reading the crypt man page. Anyone know which is correct?) You may think I'm a nit picker but lawyers are funny people. -- I speak for myself, not the company. Phil Ngai, {ucbvax,decwrl,allegra}!amdcad!phil or amdcad!phil@decwrl.dtors. .
phil@amdcad.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai) (09/01/87)
In article <4875@utah-cs.UUCP> hollaar@cs.utah.edu.UUCP (Lee Hollaar) writes:
<Actually, the Copyright Act of 1976 states in 17 USC 401:
<"(b) Form of Notice. -- The notice appearing on the copies shall consist
<of the following three elements:
< (1) the symbol ... (the letter C in a circle), or the word "Copyright"
< or the abbreviation "Copr."; and
< (2) the year of the first publication of the work; ... and
< (3) the name of the owner of the copyright ...
<(c) Position of Notice. -- ... The Register of Copyrights shall prescribe
<by regulation, as examples, specific methods for the affixation and
<positions of the notice on various types of works that will satisfy this
<requirement, but these specifications shall not be considered exhaustive."
<
<So, even though most people seem to mimic the form "copyright date company",
<the form "copyright company date" (or even "date company copyright") meets
<the requirements of the Copyright Act.
I may have posted too quickly, I'll have to check, but I don't see
that your quote addresses the question. You seem to be taking section
C as indicating that the position of the elements of the notice may
vary, but I would read it as indicating the position of the notice
(which is made up of three elements) may vary, whether it is on the
cover of the book or the title page or whatever.
--
I speak for myself, not the company.
Phil Ngai, {ucbvax,decwrl,allegra}!amdcad!phil or amdcad!phil@decwrl.dec.comron@topaz.rutgers.edu.UUCP (09/01/87)
Actually, section c is inconsequential. The notice points out that you must have three elements, implying that order is unimportant and that things like superluous punctioation (or (c)'s) do not affect the notice. -RON