Re: What makes software copyrightable anyway?

[Raul Miller <moth.debian@gmail.com>]

On 5/12/05, Michael Poole <mdpoole@troilus.org> wrote:
> Raul Miller writes:
> > 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?

Prior messages from Humberto Massa in this thread.

>  Derivative works under copyright law requires that part of the

The principle under discussion here was a different principle
from what you seem to be talking about.

What's interesting is that the Berne convention has this
to say:

   Translations, adaptations, arrangements of music and other 
   alterations of a literary or artistic work shall be protected as 
   original works without prejudice to the copyright in the original 
   work.

But Brazil is listed as a signatory of the Berne convention.
I'm guessing the issue here is that in Brazil, binaries are
not considered to be translated or adapted from the sources,
or computer programs (at least some of them) are not
considered to be literary or artistic works.

Or maybe it's just that no one has raised this issue in court,
yet.

Thanks,

-- 
Raul