Copyrighted code (was: repost:scrolling tables)

Matt Kruse wrote:

> Jon Paal wrote:
>> trying to use this script for scrolling tables found at this link:
>
> If you aren't in the kill files of most people here yet, you soon will be.
> Then your posts won't be seen at all by the people with enough knowledge
> to actually answer your questions.
>
> You keep forgetting:
> 1) You don't have permission to use the code from the url you posted. It's
> copyrighted. All code is. You cannot copy it and use it.

IBTD.

I do not think it was Richard's intention that these approaches of his do
not spread, but instead that nobody used the text of the example without
his permission (however, it is up to him to clarify this). What is an
example good for if it is not allowed to serve as such?

I, for one, publish the code I use on my Web site and post here for the
public domain, unless specified different (and I expect everybody else to
do so, CMIIW). What I resent and despise only, are people who use (my)
code (even in modified form) without mentioning the original author, making
it seem as if the whole thing was their idea, and people trying to make
money with it without the original author's explicit permission (and I
expect everybody else here to share that attitude, CMIIW).

Furthermore, Copyright is AFAIK only a concept of U.S. American legislation;
however, this is an internationally distributed newsgroup, and a globally
available Web site is probably not only subject to the legislation of one
country, too. And AIUI, Copyright is something that was introduced with
printed material; there is still a gray area here in legislation regarding
electronic media. So it is bordering to incorrect to say that one cannot
copy it and use it because of (U.S. American) Copyright. For example, EU
law, including the legislation of the Federal Republic of Germany (I
happen to live there), knows only author's rights which do not require
registration or any disclaimer of the author to become active. (IANAL)

It all boils down to the question whether concepts and algorithms can and
should be copyrighted, or even patented. I say no; the drawbacks of that
for the many are too many. "Copyleft" certainly is the better alternative.
After all, we are here to _share_ our ideas, are we not?

> 2) If the author of the code isn't willing to help you, then no one else
> probably will either.

True.

PointedEars
Received on Mon May 1 03:41:28 2006