Re: Copyright

[Cameron Kaiser <ckaiser@stockholm.ptloma.edu>]

sheercon@earthlink.net writes:

>>>     ISDA (whatever that may be) has just about everything right except
>>>the initial opinion. It is perfectly okay to copy out-of-print software
>>>so long as the copyright owner has not objected or, reasonably, is not
>>>likely to object. Telling some questioner otherwise is a severe
>>>disservice.

>>Man, you just don't get it, do you, Rubywand?  That's not their opinion,
>>it's the commonly-held interpretation of the law.  My uncle the Missouri
>>Appellate judge, my cousin-in-law the lawyer, and a whole bunch of other
>>California lawyers I know all say the same thing.

>Just out of curiosity, what is he wrong about? If the copyright owner of a
>piece of software releases it into the public domain, it then become
>perfectly legal to copy and distribute it. One example that comes to mind is
>Ian Bell's, "Elite"; it is freely and legally available over the internet in
>all of it's platforms.

Different situation though: Braben and Bell have explicitly given their
consent. If the author hasn't given his/her permission, it's still copyright
infringement, even if the practical likelihood of even unsuccessful
prosecution is just about nil (which it is in the vast majority of cases,
to be fair).

--
 Cameron Kaiser * ckaiser@stockholm.ptloma.edu * posting with a Commodore 128
   http://calvin.ptloma.edu/~spectre/ * "When in doubt, take a pawn." -- M:I
 ** Supporting the Commodore 64 and 128: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/cwi/ **
  ** <cdkaiser@concentric.net> is no longer valid -- please use new address **