Re: What makes software copyrightable anyway?
Raul Miller writes:
> On 5/12/05, Humberto Massa <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> You inverted the "do more" and "do less". Publishing an arbitrary set of
>> anthologies is "do more" as compared to publishing one story.
> Ok, here's my current understanding: permission to distribute sources
> does not constitute permission to distribute binaries. The principle
> under Brazilian law seems to be that restrictions on distribution of
> sources automatically apply to binaries.
What underlies your understanding? Derivative works under copyright
law requires that part of the change from the original be creative in
nature, although the standard for "creative" is pretty low. See, for
example, http://www.chillingeffects.org/derivative/faq.cgi#QID382 .
Courts have traditionally held that a machine's operation -- such as
compilation -- is not creative. A distribution's package may have
enough changes or elaborations to qualify as a derivative work, but
that is different from the specific case you mention.