> > If you think there is some legally relevant document which means that a ... > > work of an earlier edition), please cite that specific document.
On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 04:41:42PM -0400, Michael Poole wrote: > http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise6.html discusses the > differences between derivative works and compilations, and quotes a > congressional report that elaborates: ... > See also http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.html, which remarks > both that the whole of the derivative work must represent an original > work of authorship, rather than an arrangement of distinct works, and > that mechanical (non-creative, ergo non-copyrightable) transformation > of the original does not make a derivative. Ok, this is good -- I did not know that. However -- by this definition, the linux kernel is very definitely a derivative work, and the firmware is content which has been incorporated into the kernel. According to what you just cited, the concept of a collective work doesn't enter into the picture at all. -- Raul
