[help-3dldf] Re: Testing for ellipsoidality

[Hans Aberg]

On 2004/11/23 22:35, Laurence Finston at address@hidden wrote:

>> My explanations are a part of any first year university algebra course, and
>> not really what I, or any other mathematician, would think about
>> coyrighting. Normally, you are expected to work it out until you understand
>> it, and then write your own version of it. :-)
>> Also, I just jotted down some
>> outlines, and it may be wise for you to rework it for that reason, to make
>> sure all details come out correctly.
> 
> Clearly, the material itself is not copyrightable (or patentable---yet), but
> the formulation is.  Authors and publishers of math textbooks certainly do
> copyright them.
> 
> Martijn van Manen made a similar point to yours.  The problem is that in order
> for me to be able to include your contributions in the Texinfo manual for
> 3DLDF you _must_ assign copyright to the FSF.  I will certainly edit your
> contributions.

I just outlined some things, and it is up to you to check its correctnes. In
math, it is customary that an author writes his own version of it, and
perhaps adds "by (private) communications with N.N.". This will bypass any
copyright issues. Otherwise, a journalist quoting a person need not ask for
copyright for that, and so I think a similar things apply in your
circumstances. In addition, my comments are not copyrighted, and so of free
use until I decide to copyright them. Also, the copyright is essentially a
commercial law protecting commercial interests. If you do not violate my
potential commercial interests, or if you do not suspect I will sue you, you
can of course use the materail. It might be controversial if you copyright
my comments. I do not know what happens there in journalism. It would be
strange indeed if an interview victim cannot furtherer her comments
elsewhere because a journalist has copyrighted them.