andrew@hammer.UUCP (02/27/87)
[]
"If I were to buy a software package with sources, how
extensively would I have to make changes to the system in order
to call it my own? Would changing field names? Record/file
layouts? Running it thru a translator (Language A in, Language
B out)? Changes to mainline logic?"
If the code is copyrighted, as almost all code is, no amount of change
will let you call it your own. Anything you produce starting with that
code is a "derived work" and is the property of the owner of the
original; you have no rights to it.
The only way to make code that you can call your own is to start from
scratch or to start with public domain code.
-=- Andrew Klossner (decvax!tektronix!tekecs!andrew) [UUCP]
(tekecs!andrew.tektronix@csnet-relay) [ARPA]ciaraldi@rochester.UUCP (03/01/87)
In article <2795@hammer.TEK.COM> andrew@hammer.TEK.COM (Andrew Klossner) writes: >[] > > "If I were to buy a software package with sources, how > extensively would I have to make changes to the system in order > to call it my own? Would changing field names? Record/file > layouts? Running it thru a translator (Language A in, Language > B out)? Changes to mainline logic?" > >If the code is copyrighted, as almost all code is, no amount of change >will let you call it your own. Anything you produce starting with that >code is a "derived work" and is the property of the owner of the >original; you have no rights to it. > >The only way to make code that you can call your own is to start from >scratch or to start with public domain code. > > -=- Andrew Klossner (decvax!tektronix!tekecs!andrew) [UUCP] > (tekecs!andrew.tektronix@csnet-relay) [ARPA] That's right. Translating into another computer language is just like translating a novel into another language--the author has control over it. The author of Minix, a new Unix work-alike, says that he has had people give him programs that were identical to AT&T source code except for changing the names of the variables, claiming they were now not covered by the orignal copyright. He naturally turned them down for inclusion in his package. However... You cannot copyright an idea, only the expression of it. So, if someone figures out an especially neat algorithm and sells you the source copde for implementing it, you can still use his/her technique, but you must implement it yourself. Even though there are a theoretically infinite way to express any algorithm, in practice there are only a limited number of "natural" implementations. When I was involved with a first-year programming course, I realized how many different ways there are to accomplish a particular programming goal, and how individual programs tend to be. Mike Ciaraldi seismo!rochester!ciaraldi
phil@amdcad.UUCP (03/01/87)
In article <25420@rochester.ARPA> ciaraldi@rochester.UUCP (Mike Ciaraldi) writes: > >The author of Minix, a new Unix work-alike, says that >he has had people give him programs that were identical to >AT&T source code except for changing the names of the variables, >claiming they were now not covered by the orignal copyright. >He naturally turned them down for inclusion in his package. In addition to copyright, Unix source code is also protected by license agreements. Reimplementing the algorithms of Unix by looking at the source code supplied by AT&T is not a way to get around the licensing requirements. I believe Lauren Weinstein was very careful NOT to look at the source to uucp when he was implementing his version for the IBM PC. -- I'd rather be compatible than right. Phil Ngai +1 408 982 7840 UUCP: {ucbvax,decwrl,hplabs,allegra}!amdcad!phil ARPA: amdcad!phil@decwrl.dec.com