Re: Web application licenses
> Raul Miller <moth@debian.org> writes:
> > Alternatively, you might want to argue that computer programs are not
> > copyrightable at all [based on arguments analogous to the one you're
> > presenting now].
On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 11:50:32AM -0400, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
> The execution isn't, any more than the cycle of an engine is
> copyrightable. The code is. In other words, the creative expression
> is, but the function is not.
I agree with you here.
> So execution of code is not protected by copyright any more than any
> other machine is. Running some code doesn't interact with the
> creative parts, only the functional parts, so that's not protected by
> copyright[1]. This is old news.
I disagree with you here.
> [1] I'm being a bit fast and loose here in not dealing with quines or
> programs that print poetry. In that case, it's not the running
> program that is protected, but the output of that program which is
> a duplication and transmission of a creative work.
I agree with you here.
--
Raul
Reply to: