On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 01:58:22PM +0300, Jack L. Frost wrote: > On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 02:22:29PM +0900, Simon Walter wrote: > > Since Chung's new version is written in Python, wouldn't it be considered a > > different piece of software? I don't think a re-write in another language of > > something licensed under the MIT license can even be considered a > > derivative, much less a copy. > > Yeah, I was going to say that too: a rewrite in another language is a > completely new piece of software and I've see things like that being licensed > under a different license dozens of times. Hell, full rewrites in the same > language are often licensed differently with no problems. A full rewrite is > just that — a different implementation, especially if it's in a different > language as well.
For literature, it's well-established that a translation into another language of a copyrighted work is stiill covered by the original copyright, although the translator will also have a translation copyright. So you have to satisfy *all* the copyright owners to be able to publish. However, a new work based on the same ideas is not subject to the original copyright. Of course, it may be hard to tell wither some things are a new works or translations. --- hendrik _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
