[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Question About GNU General Public License

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Question About GNU General Public License
Date: 19 Jul 2004 11:50:54 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50

<> writes:

> In gnu.misc.discuss David Kastrup <> wrote:
> > <> writes:
> >> In gnu.misc.discuss David Kastrup <> wrote:
> >> 
> >> > My eyesight seems to get worse.  I fail to see a quote of a court
> >> > ruling stating that extracted symbol tables would not fall under
> >> > the original copyright.
> >> 
> >> I'm pretty sure a symbol table would fall under the "phonebook"
> >> ruling that a table of facts presented in obvious
> >> (i.e. non-creative) format and ordering cannot be considered a
> >> creative work.
> > Who claimed that it was?
> If the end result of the derivation has no creative content then
> there is a good argument that it is not protected by copyright.

I'd say it has no _new_ creative content, but it is an extraction of
creative content.

> There may have been creative content in the source material but the
> derivation process is in this case a process that extracts only a
> table of facts and not the creative elements.

But the "facts" are idiosyncratic to the creative elements.  If I
make a list of all set bits in the source material, this is not
something creative.

> Remember that officially, the creative content of programming is the
> arangement of instructions in a particular order to achieve a
> purpose. A symbol table contains no arrangement of instructions.

But it is an immediate consequence of such an arrangement, like the
list of all set bits.

> Another example: google counts the number of times various keywords
> are used in various websites. A count of keywords is a mechanical
> derivative of the original site content but no one has even
> attempted to claim derivative work status of google's index data on
> this basis (same for any search engine).

Well, you can't claim damages in this case because Google only
summarizes data that is openly available, anyhow.

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]