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

Re: [OT] Droit d'auteur vs. free software?

On 1 May 2003, Henning Makholm wrote:

> Scripsit Mark Rafn <dagon@dagon.net>
> > On Wed, 30 Apr 2003, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > > And I don't think that the author of a piece of software has any
> > > "literary or artistic reputation or character" connected with it.
> > You don't?  I think that artistic reputation is among the common reasons
> > for releasing free software.  It seems unlikely that Linus Torvalds's
> > reputation is completely unrelated to software he's written.
> It is not an artistic reputation.

Ooooh, I'd be mighty careful starting *that* little flamewar.  Some people
consider their programming to be art; I've seen plenty of people whose code
certainly has no hallmarks of scientific method.  Consider also the way some
programmers react when their code is criticised - like many artists get
defensive about their works...

Programming, writing a novel, and painting a picture are all, at their core,
creative endeavours.  Perhaps "moral rights" in the EU specifically discount
writing software as an artistic endeavour (you may even have mentioned it
and I missed it).  If "moral rights" do this, then you are perfectly
correct, and I'll keep quiet on the matter...

> > > Anyway, by voluntarily releasing his work under a free license, the
> > > author unmistakenly states that his literary or artistic reputation
> > > cannot be considered violated by any form of derived work.
> > Except he cannot actually grant this blanket permission under sub 3.
> He cannot grant a permission to violate. But since no violation is
> possible, that does not matter.

Can no violation take place because software is treated differently under
"moral rights" than other creative endeavours?

#include <disclaimer.h>
Matthew Palmer, Geek In Residence

Reply to: