[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Steve Lidie <Stephen.O.Lidie@Lehigh.EDU>] Re: xodometer licensing

On Mon, Feb 26, 2001 at 02:45:16PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2001, Sam TH wrote:
> >On Mon, Feb 26, 2001 at 01:42:53PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
> >> On Mon, 26 Feb 2001, Sam TH wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Second, Perl was released in the mid-80s.  The current copyright law
> >> >is ten years older than that.  I don't know exactly when the AL was
> >> >written, but this would suggest that it postdates the Copyright Act of
> >> >1976.
> >>
> >> The "copyright by definition" is codified in Berne and the DMCA.  Think
> >> 1990 rather than 1970...
> >
> >1. The Berne Convention and the DMCA are not related.  The DMCA is
> >actually an overzealous implementation of a different treaty, the WIPO
> >Copyright treaty, passed in 1996.  See
> >http://www.wipo.org/treaties/ip/copyright/copyright.html
> >
> >The Berne Convention was last amended in 1979.  See
> >http://www.wipo.org/eng/general/copyrght/bern.htm
>         ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Unrelated?  Yet at the same URL....

WIPO manages UDRP as well, but that has nothing to do with either.  

> >2. Default copyright was established both in the Copyright Act of 1976
> >and the Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988.  The relevant
>                                                 ^^^^
> When did you say perl came in to the scene?

1987.  But as was pointed out in a different mail to you, default
copyright actually began before that.  And if you read the section I
pointed you to, it also talks about default copyright for works
created *before the BCIA in 1988.  Furthermore, when the license was
published is irrelevant, remember?  

> >sections of the US Code are 17 USC 401 et. seq.  I encourage you to
> >read them.
> http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/
> If you aren't going to provide the URL, I will...
> BTW, look at 17 USC 411a
>  (a) Except for an action brought for a violation of the rights of
>        the author under section 106A(a), and subject to the provisions of
>        subsection (b), no action for infringement of the copyright in any
>        United States work shall be instituted until registration of the
>        copyright claim has been made in accordance with this title.
> Looks like the "copyright by definition" still has a few bugs to work
> out...

Well, in order to bring a case of copyright infringement, the work
must be registered. However, this can be done well *after* the work is
published.  In fact, it is often the first step in bringing
infringement proceedings.  

> Just for clarity 17 USC 106A is about attribution of works...

And this is relevant how?
	sam th		     
	GnuPG Key:  

Attachment: pgpTLNvUpptP0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: