jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) (11/30/90)
In article <2757@cirrusl.UUCP> dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) writes: >If use, duplication, and disclosure is prohibited without express >written permission, and no such express written permission has been >supplied, what's the point of posting this to alt.sources? Even if >such permission is available, it's quite meaningless to ask for >non-disclosure of any code that's posted to Usenet. It's called "a formality". I actually have a vi key bound to a command which inserts copyright notices at the very top of source code files. Honest people don't have problems with copyright notices. In several years of posting source code I have only =once= refused distribution or duplication permission to anyone. That was to a company which wanted to use a dialer package I posted without giving any credit to me for authorship or without paying a token royalty. The dialer package was to be part of a communications application which they were selling for profit. >"Non-commercial (profit-making)"...isn't that an oxymoronic phrase? Hmmm. Yes, I suppose you might have a point there - it probably should read "Non-commercial (not profit making) distribution permitted". >What has Usenet come to? (At least, what has the alt.* hierarchy come >to?) Just because it's the alt.net you get to steal other people's work? Please, if that's the case I'll stop posting code, as will many others who don't believe in plagiarism or outright theft. -- John F. Haugh II UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh Ma Bell: (512) 832-8832 Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org "SCCS, the source motel! Programs check in and never check out!" -- Ken Thompson
jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) (12/03/90)
In article <sean.660083458@s.ms.uky.edu> sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) writes: >We've gone over this 1000 times. Copyright law cannot limit use or >disclosure! It can only limit duplication and public performances! >Most of Haugh's copyright restrictions are bogus. my dictionary understanding of the words "use", "disclosure", "duplication" and "performance" all lead me to believe my copyright notice is quite valid. the alternative is to insert something like the GNU GPL into every source file, which doesn't strike me as being all that efficient but =would= specify in minute detail exactly what you are permitted to do. just to reiterate, only once have i ever denied anyone the ability to use or duplicate or whatever any code that i have ever posted. clearly i am doing something right since the desired goal is being met. the rules for using the code i write are probably identical to what everyone else expects - either give me credit, or give me money. most people just give me credit where credit is due. -- John F. Haugh II UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh Ma Bell: (512) 832-8832 Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org "Rich Salz is not doing his job. The obligation on him now is ... to resign" -- Chip Salzenberg
dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) (12/03/90)
In <18765@rpp386.cactus.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes: >Just because it's the alt.net you get to steal other people's work? >Please, if that's the case I'll stop posting code, as will many >others who don't believe in plagiarism or outright theft. Well, you can't really have it two ways. If you consider it plagiarism or outright theft for people to use the code that you post in alt.sources, then you shouldn't be posting it in the first place. If not so, then you shouldn't be posting the code here and insisting on that strange copyright notice that prohibits disclosure. Do you seriously me to make others sign a non-disclosure agreement before I install some utility that uses your code for use on our machines? If the purpose of that copyright notice is to ensure correct author attribution, then it is enough to state that, e.g., "permission is granted to use...etc...provided this copyright notice is preserved." -- Rahul Dhesi <dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com> UUCP: oliveb!cirrusl!dhesi
jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) (12/03/90)
In article <2761@cirrusl.UUCP> dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) writes: >If the purpose of that copyright notice is to ensure correct author >attribution, then it is enough to state that, e.g., "permission is >granted to use...etc...provided this copyright notice is preserved." if you or anyone else have real suggestions (like the exact wording), i'd appreciate seeing them. however, as this is the first time i've seen any complaints, and as it is the exact same wording i've been using for three years, i am having a hard time believing that anyone is really having trouble with that copyright notice. seriously, if you have some "favorite" 4 or 5 line copyright notice that you think is better, mail it to me. -- John F. Haugh II UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh Ma Bell: (512) 832-8832 Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) (12/04/90)
In <18770@rpp386.cactus.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes: >seriously, if you have some "favorite" 4 or 5 line copyright notice >that you think is better, mail it to me. Here you are (posted rather than mailed): (C) Copyright 1990 <your name>, All rights reserved. Permission is granted to copy and create derivate works for any purpose, whether commercial or noncomemrcial, provided this copyright message is preserved in all copies. -- Rahul Dhesi <dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com> UUCP: oliveb!cirrusl!dhesi
jkimble@bally.Bally.COM (The Programmer Guy) (12/04/90)
In article <18769@rpp386.cactus.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes: >my dictionary understanding of the words "use", "disclosure", >"duplication" and "performance" all lead me to believe my >copyright notice is quite valid. Well, when the court system of the United States starts making regular phone calls to *you* asking for *your* understanding, maybe the rest of us will begin to give you a little credibility. Are you trying to start another net-wide conflict were you are obviously in the wrong and nearly everyone (except, maybe, BIFF) is against you? USENET 3, JFH 0. Go back to playing Ghod's Gift To Programming and handing out your lessons that illustrate your [lack of] knowledge on the functionality of ASSERT. Of course, I say this with respect because we all know that you are the *only* person on The Net that actually gets *paid* to write code. -- --Jim Kimble, jkimble@bally.bally.com Consulting for Bally Gaming (the slot machine people) uunet!bally!jkimble "ALPO is 99 cents a can. That's over SEVEN dog dollars!!"
jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) (12/04/90)
In article <409@bally.Bally.COM> jkimble@bally.bally.com (The Programmer Guy) writes: >Go back to playing Ghod's Gift To Programming and handing out your >lessons that illustrate your [lack of] knowledge on the functionality >of ASSERT. hey, i'm sorry you never had to work on a system that doesn't behave like that VAX you used in school. but then - all the world's not a VAX, now is it? use the source, luke, cuz bo don't know shit. -- John F. Haugh II UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh Ma Bell: (512) 832-8832 Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) (12/04/90)
In article <2762@cirrusl.UUCP> dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) writes: >Here you are (posted rather than mailed): Thanks. I'm always willing to consider a little constructive commentary. How about this one - /* * Copyright 1990, John F. Haugh II * All rights reserved. * * Permission is granted to copy and create derivative works for any * non-commercial purpose, provided this copyright notice is preserved * in all copies of source code, or included in human readable form * and conspicuously displayed on all copies of object code or * distribution media. */ -- John F. Haugh II UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh Ma Bell: (512) 832-8832 Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) (12/05/90)
In <18780@rpp386.cactus.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
[a new improved copyright statement]
GOOD! Big improvement -- I like it!
--
Rahul Dhesi <dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com>
UUCP: oliveb!cirrusl!dhesikarl@ficc.ferranti.com (Karl Lehenbauer) (12/07/90)
In article <18780@rpp386.cactus.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes: > * Permission is granted to copy and create derivative works for any > * non-commercial purpose, provided ... How about... * Copyright 1990 John F. Haugh II * Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this * software and its documentation for any purpose and without * fee is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright * notice appear in all copies. John F. Haugh II makes no * representations about the suitability of this software for * any purpose. It is provided "as is" without express or * implied warranty. It probably protects you from getting sued for bugs, and who cares if someone makes a few bucks off some tossed-off hack? Our forthcoming Tcl release, definitely not a tossed-off hack, will be redistributable for any purpose, including commercial... -- -- uunet!sugar!ficc!karl (wk), "Any excuse will serve a tyrant." -- Aesop uunet!sugar!karl (hm)
jkimble@bally.Bally.COM (The Programmer Guy) (12/12/90)
In article <18777@rpp386.cactus.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes: >use the source, luke, cuz bo don't know shit. A fitting quote from the unoffical USENET Posting Policy Guide: # 10. When in doubt, insult: If you forget the other rules, remember this # one. At some point during your wonderful career on USENET you will # undoubtedly end up in a flame war with someone who is better than you. # This person will expose your lies, tear apart your arguments, make you # look generally like a bozo. At this point, there's only one thing to # do: insult the dirtbag!!! "Oh yeah? Well, you do strange things with # vegetables." Cheers, -- --Jim Kimble, jkimble@bally.bally.com Consulting for Bally Gaming (the slot machine people) uunet!bally!jkimble "ALPO is 99 cents a can. That's over SEVEN dog dollars!!"