[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Licensing question about the BSD

From: Isaac
Subject: Re: Licensing question about the BSD
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 21:58:43 -0500
User-agent: slrn/ (Linux)

On 05 Aug 2005 09:04:01 -0400, Bruce Lewis <> wrote:
> Alexander Terekhov <> writes:
>> Yeah, I should have said that copyright doesn't establish exclusive
>> right to "designed to fit". Ok now?
> Just from your words: "To fit" is one definition of "adapt".  Adaptation
> is one form of derivative work.  Derivative work is an exclusive right
> of copyright.
> Furthermore, software that builds on but does not modify other software
> could be described by any of the three verbs in "or any other form in
> which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted."

I think suggesting that an unmodified work has been recast or transformed in
form is a pretty big stretch.  Adapted comes the closest, but in my opinion
adapting requires making at least some change to fit.  Yet you've expressly
stated that the original software has not been modified.

Maybe building on other software without modifying it does result in a
derivative work, but I don't think parsing the literal meaning of the
statute is going to support the argument.  I'd want to see some case law.


reply via email to

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