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

Re: ITP:Bug#460591 - Falcon P.L. license

Hash: SHA1

MJ Ray wrote:
> Sean Kellogg <skellogg@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wednesday 19 March 2008 03:10:07 pm Francesco Poli wrote:
>>> I don't think that copyright laws give you the right to control
>>>  distribution of "Scripts", that is to say, works written in
>>> your programming language.
>> [...] There's even the question of how someone goes about
>> learning the language... presumably by example (that's how I've
>> learned most other languages). Can I create a work that is not
>> derivative of those examples and thus under the preview of
>> copyright law?
>> This would have made a fun topic to write about in law school :)
> Sure.  I suspect there's quite a bit of case law about it,
> including some generated by the loglan/lojban disputes, where 'JCB
> claimed copyright to the language (any use of Loglan had to be
> approved by him)' Source: http://arj.nvg.org/lojban/why-i-like.html
> I'm suspicious of any language where the definer is the first
> implementer and hasn't renounced all claim to works in that
> language.  They look like lawyerbombs to me because I don't know
> any better.  Is that a good thing to have when trying to promote
> your new language?
> Regards,
The idea I tried to follow is exactly that to free the language
definition from any possible current and future claim (i.e. through

Giancarlo Niccolai.
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


Reply to: