Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Alternatively, you might want to argue that computer programs are not
> copyrightable at all [based on arguments analogous to the one you're
> presenting now].
The execution isn't, any more than the cycle of an engine is
copyrightable. The code is. In other words, the creative expression
is, but the function is not.
So execution of code is not protected by copyright any more than any
other machine is. Running some code doesn't interact with the
creative parts, only the functional parts, so that's not protected by
copyright[1]. This is old news.
-Brian
[1] I'm being a bit fast and loose here in not dealing with quines or
programs that print poetry. In that case, it's not the running
program that is protected, but the output of that program which is
a duplication and transmission of a creative work.
--
Brian Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
