MESSAGE
| DATE | 2015-03-18 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] Apple crimes
|
On 03/18/2015 01:37 AM, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting prmarino1-at-gmail.com (prmarino1-at-gmail.com):
>
>> We were essentially saying the same thing I just dumbed it down.?
>> Essentially once it is included in the upstream project with any
>> additional modifications it becomes a new whole piece of software.
> But with more owners. (Technically, no, it is not a 'whole new piece of
> software'. In legal terms, it is a derivative work. Which please see.)
>
>> So in a sense both now hold an individual copyright on the code;
>> however you are quite wrong on the assertion that people don't give
>> away the rights to their code.
> Cite controlling law, please. I did. You, by contrast, are merely
> asserting I (and the Copyright Act, which I cited) are mistaken without
> stating any reason, let alone the damned impressive one required to
> overrule primary Federal statute law. Kindly state your legal authority.
>
>> In fact it happens all the time with open source software due to
>> submission agreements most people don't read.
> Example, please?
http://www.mrbrklyn.com/images/los_angeles_2014/IMG_3553.JPG
|
|
