jsims@vuse.vanderbilt.edu (J. Robert Sims) (11/30/90)
If somebody writes a program to be freely distributed, and does not copyright it, another person can then sell that program for a profit, and not even give credit to the author. Another person might also get away with copyrighting the program, and take all rights to distribution, etc. away from the original author. The "call me" type permissions gives the author a chance to make some money off of a group that intends to use it for a purely commercial purpose. Writing software and distributing it in the public domain is a great thing for everyone; the whole network gets some really top notch software, and the author receives recognition. If I start a company to sell TETRIS, and used your program, without even giving you credit, wouldn't you be upset? If anyone makes a profit from software, it should be the author. Companies do pay attention to copyrights, and you would have legal recourse against those few that didn't. Many of the copyrights also state that the program may not be modified, or that modifications must be clearly marked as such. I know that I would not want to be blamed for someone else's defective modification to a program I wrote. Many programs on this group can easily cause loss of memory, and possibly damage hardware, especially the non-self contained programs. The disclaimer of liability also serves as a warning to users of the program. I think that these disclaimers are good to include, especially for the novice user encountering a complicated program for the first time. If a novice user loses his memory without being warned, he is likely to be quite upset, especially at the author. The copyright messages really aren't that long. They may take a significant amount of space in a newsletter, but you might get by with one set of notations in the back and reference the appropriate type of copyright for each article. The real solution, of course, is to shoot all the lawyers. Rob
peraino@gmuvax.gmu.edu (11/30/90)
>From: edu%"handhelds@gac.edu" 30-NOV-1990 00:27:25.84 >To: HANDHELDS@gacvx2.gac.edu >Subj: COPYRIGHT -- WHY?? Lines: 66 >COPYRIGHT -- WHY?? > >I am constantly amazed at all the large, "professional-looking" copyright messag > es that people put in their postings of relatively small programs. > >I simply cannot see the reason for this. Do you seriously beleive that someone m > ight publish your program someday and pay you It's a matter of protection, not payment, in this case. >Or are you afraid that >someone will "steal" your idea? Do you think that a copyright message will pr >event this? In fact, it will prevent it, if you persue it. I believe that in this country, copyright law states that something can be considered copyrighted provided it spells out "COPYRIGHT" or displays the small 'c' with a circle around it. >Many postings also have a passus that, in essence, says "Don't blame me if somet > hing bad happens when you use my programs". The interesting thing is that thi > s also is written in MANY more words, in a professional style. Better to err on the side of caution, wouldn't you say? What harm does a disclaimer do? >Is there really a need for the extensive type of disclaimers that people often u > se? Why are they used? For protection. I can only speak for myself, but many people probably have the same philosophy; I don't want someone blaming me if something I wrote trashed their machine; especially if the software is free. >Since I am active in a user group in Sweden, I often wish to publish programs th > at has copyright messages of the type "ask me first". Then I have to go throu > gh the trouble contacting the author, only to receive a "sure, go ahead and c > opy it". Of course it > might be nice for the author to receive such requests from everywhere, but is t > his really necessary? It let's the author know where his/her work is going, if nothing else. Also, it gives the author the chance to refuse, if he/she thinks that the software will be used in a profit-making venture. >Now please note that I am NOT questioning the right to have a large program or o >ther contribution copyrighted. With large I mean like SASS, KERMIT and Alonzo >'s internals texts. The type of thing I am questioning is copyrighting progra >ms like my own TETRIS The term 'large' is relative; TETRIS is a 'large' program, for the 48. But size isn't important. I believe in credit where credit is due. If I use someone's program or algorithm in something else I am writing, I believe in giving credit for that program/algorithm. >Erik Bryntse / SHPRF (Svenska HP-raknarforeningen) > >erikmb@cd.chalmers.se peraino@gmuvax.gmu.edu
akcs.azz710@hpcvbbs.UUCP (Jeffrey R. Broido) (12/01/90)
I wrote a program in '84 for IBM mainframes running MVS/XA. I included
copyright notices in the source and object code and sent it to a widely
distributed public domain software collection (CBT's MVS Mods
collection). My copyright noticed retained all rights except the right
was granted to freely use and distribute as long as it remained free (the
standard sort of thing). It was lifted by a large software house (Boole
and Babbage) and included in an expensive ($50,000 plus maintenance)
utility collection ("Resolve"). They removed my copyright notice and
substituted one of their own. I had never registered my copyright, but
still had some of my five years left and could have. I didn't act since
they have a large legal staff and was advised against taking the time and
bother, but I've been smarting over it ever since. I like best your last
idea. Jefftt@tarzan.jyu.fi (Tapani Tarvainen) (12/01/90)
In article <ACE9ABD920002850@gacvx2.gac.edu> peraino@gmuvax.gmu.edu writes: > In fact, it will prevent it, if you persue it. I believe that in this > country, copyright law states that something can be considered copyrighted > provided it spells out "COPYRIGHT" or displays the small 'c' with a circle > around it. This is out of date. The USA joined the Berne copyright convention a few years ago, and since then everything copyrightable is born with copyright, whether it is explicitly claimed or not. You must explicitly disclaim your copyright or declare your work public domain or give whatever rights you want people to have (like "may be freely used for non-commercial purposes"). There is also a "fair use" clause allowing copying for personal use and partial quoting for review purposes, but redistribution, even for free, is prohibited. Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer. Don't take my word for it. (Try misc.legal if you want more details.) -- Tapani Tarvainen (tarvaine@jyu.fi, tarvainen@finjyu.bitnet)
EBERBERS%yubgef51@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU (12/02/90)
> Is there really a need for the extensive type of disclaimers that people often u > se? Why are they used? Because there are unreasonable people out there. If Your program trashes somebodies machine and valuable data - he can sue you - and the fact that you didn't charge for the program doesn't count at all since it's lawyer can accuse you that you have produced bugged program on purpose of damaging other peoples data and in a second - you are a monster. So, would you take a chance when you know that you can simply copy the first disclaimer you come across and play safe ?? (yes - there is no copyright on disclaimer :-) and best and most secure are HP and Apple disclaimers - they obviously pay their lawyers best :-). The real problem is that huge companies always try to misuse disclaimers and same states are changing their legislation in order to prevent it but this is another subject. > Since I am active in a user group in Sweden, I often wish to publish programs th > at has copyright messages of the type "ask me first". Then I have to go throu > gh the trouble contacting the author, only to receive a "sure, go ahead and c > opy it". Having a net at your disposal this is advantage - not a trouble. Dropping someone a few lines asking such permission is 5-sec. mark-block-and-copy job and since all authors like to see that someone appreciate their work so they usually send you a new, improved and debugged version (since this is also a 5-sec. job for him) if such exist. > s, and publish the program anyway, or you print the copyright message in full. It doesn't look to nic > e to have lots of such messages all over your magazine, I can tell you! Just use 3 point letters and 10 lines will became 2-3 in a footnote :-) Or even better - put a global disclaimer for the magazine issue and you have solved all legal problems although we are not discussing real but very hypothetical problem - that an author of freeware would hire a Swedish lawyer to sue your club for publishing it's program without prior written permission. >> Or are you afraid that >> someone will "steal" your idea? Do you think that a copyright message will pr >> event this? > > In fact, it will prevent it, if you pursue it. It definitely WILL NOT! No law can prevent you from stealing somebodies IDEA . There is no copyright on idea, algorithm, data representation and stuff like tha t - just on it's implementation. There have been come attempts on enforcing copyri ght on ideas in USA but they have all failed and in Europe people consider the very idea of copyrighted idea ridiculous.