perry@omepd.UUCP (02/19/87)
In article <471@gouldsd.UUCP> mjranum@gouldsd.UUCP (Marcus J Ranum) writes: > >2) recently I have read unpleasant rumors of Microsoft C producing >'Copyright Microsoft' headers in executables. ... Oops! Don't frighten me like that! I've checked my binaries. Microsoft C does not put any copyright notice into the binaries (.OBJ files) it generates. The C runtime library does contain a notice that reads C library - (C)Copyright Microsoft Corp. 1986 and appears magically in all executable programs that use Microsoft's C library. This means (I think) that the C *library* is copyrighted. (Surprise!) Question now (and that's what Marcus was really talking about): if I write a program with MS C, using (by practical necessity) the C library, and sell this program, what is the legal situation? Do I infringe Microsoft's copyright? I am pretty sure that nowhere in the documentation there is any explicit notice (such as MS reserves the right... etc.). On the other hand, I don't think they explicitly allow selling such programs either. Could someone knowledgeable please explain the legalese? I'm [almost] sure that similar questions have been asked on the net before, so I might as well apologize right now. But I'd still like to know the answers... Thank you. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ << Perry The Cynic >> ...!tektronix!ogcvax!omepd!inteloa!perry ...!verdix!omepd!inteloa!perry (Peter Kiehtreiber) -or try- perry@inteloa.intel.com
ittfb@dcatla.UUCP (02/25/87)
Quoting from the "Microsoft Compiler License Agreement" (That
sealed envelope that your disks came in):
2. DISTRIBUTION OF RUNTIME MODULES: Microsoft grants you a royalty-
free right to reproduce and distribute the runtime modules of the
COMPILER ...
This means that for the purposes of your program development and
any programs you sell, Microsoft relinquishes its copyright of
the library routines, subject to the (not unreasonable) conditions
stated in the license agreement.
You should have read this agreement before you ever opened the
envelope containing your diskettes for the compiler. You might
not have liked what it said. The confusion here seems to be
between "copyright" and "license". I'd suggest that you take
this license agreement and your questions to a good lawyer (one
with computer law experience) _before_ you try to market any
product you develop using _ANYONE'S_ software. If you live in
the Atlanta area, I can recommend one.
Tom Blakely
DCA, Inc.
Alpharetta, GA 30201
(404)442-4866
{sunatl,akgua,gatech}!dcatla!ittfbpitaro@savax.UUCP (02/26/87)
I think this restriction of having to acknowledge Microsoft's C library is ridiculous. Suppose I buy a pad of writing paper which is copyrighted. (Says so on the plastic wrap). Am I expected to acknowlegde the paper manufacturer on every article I write? Suppose again that I use a set of copyrighted fonts on my printer. Should I have to acknowledge the font designer on every sheet of paper, right next to the acknowledgement of the paper manufacturer? The idea that a compiler's output can be copyrighted by the compiler's writer is crazy. I know that we're talking about library functions but if you stretch your imagination a bit then the translation of "printf(~~)" into a series of machine code is not much different than the translation of "a *= b" into "MUL b" other than one of scale. The whole issue seems to me to be a result of these bogus plastic wrap "software licenses" on what is obviously a consumer sale is bogus. I go into a software store to buy software, not a license to use software. Michael Pitaro USMail: Sanders Associates UUCP: decvax!savax!pitaro MER24-1583C PHONE: +1 (603) 885-9036 CS 2034 HOME: 46-D Hampshire Drive Nashua, NH 03063-2034 Nashua, NH 03063