MESSAGE
| DATE | 2015-03-17 |
| FROM | Rick Moen
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] Apple crimes
|
Quoting Ruben Safir (mrbrklyn-at-panix.com):
> On 03/17/2015 03:58 PM, Rick Moen wrote:
> > Oh, so FSF is entitled to own what Apple creates using its own efforts?
>
> Well since YOU put it that way, then yes.
In Rubenworld, sure. In this one, sorry, no, people who make creative
works are entitled to legal title over what they make.
There are a variety of reasons why I'm sometimes willing to sign over
title to a creative work I've written, like being offered a big fistfull
of cash in exchange, or for some reason I really like you a lot, but I'd
regard, say, the authors of PerlHoo, if they were to approach me and
demand copyright ownership over the improvements I deployed at the
Linuxmafia Knowledgebase after hacking PerlHoo for a while as really
crazy. Or as sudden arrivals from Rubenworld, which I guess amounts to
the same thing.
>> Is Linus Torvalds entitled to gain copyright ownership over everyone
>> else's code contributions to the Linux kernel?
>
> and that is Definitely Yes.
So, where is the overblown, ranty, reality-challenged broadside calling
every Linux kernel contributor other than Torvalds a criminal? C'mon,
Ruben! I'm confident you can create one.
> We don't own thoughts and ideas...
The Library of Congress Copyright office doesn't agree with you about
creative works in the statutory 17 U.S.C. categories with unexpired
copyright terms (if that is what you mean by 'thoughts'), and the US
Patent Office doesn't agree with you about useful inventions (if that is
what you mean by 'ideas'). Nor does centuries of established law in
those areas.
But you go on ahead thinking that, sir. It's the punim-up-tochis
gumption that everyone so famously admires.
|
|
