Re: How long is it acceptable to leave *undistributable* files in
Joe Moore writes:
> Michael Poole wrote:
>> See also http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.html, which remarks both
>> that the whole of the derivative work must represent an original work
>> of authorship, rather than an arrangement of distinct works, and that
>> mechanical (non-creative, ergo non-copyrightable) transformation of the
>> original does not make a derivative.
> Doesn't this mean that the compiled (in the computer sense) binary is not a
> derivative work of the source? (mechanical transformation from C code to
> ELF executable does not make a derivative?)
I believe that for the purposes of copyright, mechanical translations
are protected the same ways as the original work. You raise a good
point, though; I have seen some analyses that do treat a compiled
version of code as a derivative work. As usual, I am willing to be
convinced by solid references or arguments.