| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
SCO's copyright letterSCO's copyright letterPosted Dec 22, 2003 19:13 UTC (Mon) by Phong (guest, #18033)Parent article: SCO's copyright letter SCO's letter contains this: No one may use our copyrighted code except as authorized by us. However, copyright doesn't limit something's use, just who can copy it. So, isn't this statement without legal merit?
(Log in to post comments)
SCO's copyright letter Posted Dec 22, 2003 22:12 UTC (Mon) by pjs (guest, #10927) [Link] This would seem like a reasonable conclusing IF copies of the code were sold, as books, records and newspapers are. But SCO and virtually all proprietary software vendors do not sell, but rather license their code. You enter into a contractual agreement in exchange for receiving a copy of the code.Presumably SCO argues that all of their licensing agreements have imposed limits on how the code can be used. Then again, they've made all sorts of arguements that have been shown to be (mostly) bogus. Of course, IANAL, so this is merely my impression from what I've read from what seem to be credible sources. The questions of "legal merit" or even the more pragmatic question of how one would settle or fight in the event of a real threat are beyond me. But it is clear that software vendors do utilize contract law to impose restrictions that copyright law would not.
SCO's copyright letter Posted Dec 23, 2003 12:17 UTC (Tue) by hingo (guest, #14792) [Link] You should remember, that every time you use a computer program, the code is copied from your harddrive to RAM memory. Altough this seems to be nitpicking, this fact alone is usually used as an argument, why any use (other than using the discs as frisbees) of a computer program falls under the governance of copyright law. Therefore analogies from the world of books do not always work with software, because "using a book" (reading it) has nothing to do with copyright, while "using a computer program" has.henrik
|
|
||||||||||||