Re: Choosing a License: GNU APL? AFL 3.0?
John Halton wrote:
> a. I don't think a copyright notice can be taken as an assertion of
> authorship, precisely because the copyright may be owned by someone
> other than the author. Hence most books that are published in the UK
> include both a copyright notice (usually naming the publisher as
> owner) and a statement that the author has asserted their moral
> rights.
True. Let's try again: if the sole mention of a natural person who
is the creator occurs in the form of a copyright notice, then I
would take that as a claim of authorship.
> b. Even if a copyright notice could be read as an assertion of the
> author's moral rights to be identified as the author, I don't think
> this would make the text of the notice itself inviolable - provided
> that the author was still acknowledged elsewhere.
I'm not sure. If the author chooses a particular way of being
mentioned as author, does that override any other way of identifying
him as author?
> > Under US law, art. 6bis Berne does not apply (even though it should)
> > to authors of computer programs.
>
> Ditto English law. I think that betrays an assumption on the part of
> US and UK lawmakers that computer programmers are merely technicians,
> not creative artists.
Can Berne be invoked directly in the UK? I know the US has closed
that route. The issue here is that computer programs are to be
protected as "literary works" in Europe (Directive 91/250/EC), and
that means they get the full range of protection. Moral rights are
part of that protection, so a EU member state should have the
moral rights available to software authors.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch & European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/
Reply to: