www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevan Miller <kevan.mil...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: CC-BY in context
Date Mon, 10 Jun 2013 14:27:06 GMT

On Jun 6, 2013, at 7:53 PM, Jeffrey Thompson <jthom@us.ibm.com> wrote:

> "Lawrence Rosen" <lrosen@rosenlaw.com> wrote on 06/06/2013 03:57:49 PM:
> > There is a difficult debate underway (in court and in academic 
> > circles) whether the implementation of a specification in software 
> > is a derivative work of the specification. Some say yes, some say 
> > no, some say sometimes. In any event, will CC-BY give us the 
> > permission we want -- even if we don't think we need it -- to 
> > implement that specification?
> Regardless of the answer to the question whether I need a copyright license to read your
specification and write code that implements the system / algorithm / interface / whatever
described in that specification, I think that if the specification includes code artifacts
(e.g., schema, DTDs) that are intended to be copied into implementations unchanged, it would
be helpful if the author clearly stated that this was permissible w/o requiring any particular
outbound license.
> While someone could argue that no license is required, why have the argument?  As we've
previously discussed, I think CC-BY has a problem there.  While its perfectly appropriate
for the Specification itself, the code artifacts would be better licensed under a license
which allows relicensing.

FYI, we have an exception for Category B licenses to handle this very case (see the next to
last paragraph):


To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

View raw message