Re: [OT] Droit d'auteur vs. free software?
Scripsit tb@becket.net (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
> Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net> writes:
> > Did you read the exact wording I posted? It very specifically protects
> > exactly the author's intention. Nothing more.
> What if the author's intention is that anyone do whatever they want
> with the work, and explicitly says "I hereby waive any of my so-called
> moral rights"?
He cannot do that. But his action of releasing the work under a free
license will have the coincidental effect that it becomes impossible
to violate the artistic integrity of the work, because the integrity
consists exactly in the work being free.
> In that case, his heirs can *still* come back and say "no waiver is
> possible",
The moral rights cannot be waived, but they can become irrelevant,
which is the situation we're taling about here.
> and "your modification of the work makes his artistic
> integrity look bad", and it will be their judgment and the court's
> that controls.
The heirs' judgement controls nothing at all. The court's does, of
course, but the unless the court purposefully misunderstands the
intent of the law and the author's intention [1] it will of course
rule in favor of the author's explicit wishes.
[1] In which case every bet is off. But in that case the problems
arise IN SPITE OF to the law, not BEACAUSE of it.
--
Henning Makholm "... not one has been remembered from the time
when the author studied freshman physics. Quite the
contrary: he merely remembers that such and such is true, and to
explain it he invents a demonstration at the moment it is needed."
Reply to: