Re: Draft new DFSG

[Ian Jackson <ian@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Dale Scheetz writes ("Re: Draft new DFSG"):
...
> Now, a copyright pertains to, and only to, that string of characters that
> was produced by the author, and which he has the legal rights to
> copyright. It is only that specific document that the author may
> copyright.
> 
> In order to protect that copyright, and the license it supports, it is
> reasonable, no, even necessary, that the source so copyrighted remain
> unchanged. The changes proposed, or produced, by some other party can not
> be covered in said copyright simply because the license says so. Any new
> source produced from the original work with modifications provided by
> another party is not, and can not be, covered by the original copyright.

I think this is simply not true.  For starters, the copyright holder
can control creation of derivative works, which allows them to specify
the terms for ownard licencing by the licence used to create the
derivative.

Furthermore, a derivative work has shared copyright, not copyright
only by the deriver.

If you still disagree I'll dig up references.

Ian.