In article <vl7Ak.413$686.276@fe101.usenetserver.com>,
Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote:
Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
But if you looked at Linux, decided the scheduler was crap, and then wrote a
completely new scheduler for Linux, then that would be a derivative work
No, it would not. By statute, in the U.S., a derivative work is a
transformation of another work which retains its original purpose -
A new version of Linux with a different scheduler serves the same
purpose: they're both operating system kernels.
turning a short story into a movie script, or translating into a
different language. See the Harry Potter case, where the judge said
that turning narratives into a reference text, even with massive
copying from the original sources, does not make the reference text
a derivative work of the novels, because the reference does not serve
the same purpose as the novels even though it is a transformation of
them.
I think the real-world analogy to the scenario Ciaran described would be
if you took the Harry Potter text, removed a chapter, and replaced it
with a new chapter that you wrote. What would the status of the
resulting book be? Is it a derivative of the original Harry Potter, or
a compilation of the originnal chapters (minus 1) and the new chapter?