[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: [OT] Legal issues in SW development [Was: Proposal: Constant Tables]
- From: Lorenzo Donati <lorenzodonatibz@...>
- Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2011 08:31:13 +0200
On 14/08/2011 1.18, marbux wrote:
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 12:30 PM, David Given<firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
What is the implicit license if someone doesn't declare one then?
In theory, none --- without a license, the code cannot be redistributed
I'm happy to say that I am no longer a lawyer although I was until I
retired. Copyright infringement is a difficult topic on which to
generalize. It's not quite as iron-clad as stated. There are
exceptions. For example:
Thank you for the legally-informed insight!
-- The fair use exception applies in most jurisdictions; however what
constitutes "fair use" isn't clear cut in most situations. I'll hazard
a guess that most courts would likely hold that it's fair use to quote
an email when replying to it. :-)
-- The E.U. has a directive exempting copying for personal use.
I cannot tell for this one in particular, but Italy has a very bad
record for ratifying EU directives with long delays. :-(
As someone developing a set of scripting tools for free distribution,
I find it somewhat irksome when snippets are published under the
MIT/X11 license or similar that require including a separate copy of
the license used in the script or its readme for each separate snippet
used. (MIT/X11 requires inclusion of "this notice", which includes the
author's name and copyright date so quite literally a separate copy
required for each snippet recycled.)
Commonly, the license is longer than the snippet,
I never realized that. Good to know!
> leaving me to wonder
whether the people who slapped that license on their snippets realized
that the license requires inclusion of a copy of it with each
republication of the original or a derivative work. See e.g.,
<http://snippets.luacode.org/> (all licensed under MIT/X11).
I'd much rather work with CC0 snippets or with snippets under a
license that requires only the URL for the license. Far less bother to
include a comment pointing to the license or copyright waiver than to
include the license.