On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 08:07:57 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:32 AM, Mark Janssen > <dreamingforw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> That's not entirely correct. If he *publishes* his code (I'm using >> this term "publish" technically to mean "put forth in a way where >> anyone of the general public can or is encouraged to view"), then he is >> *tacitly* giving up protections that secrecy (or *not* disclosing it) >> would *automatically* grant. The only preserved right is authorship >> after that. So it can be re-distributed freely, if authorship is >> preserved. The only issue after that is "fair use" and that includes >> running the program (not merely copying the source). > > (Digression follows.) That was true back in the late 1800s in the US, > but was not true in England at that time, and was solved in a > unification of copyright laws and treaties. There was a huge issue over > the copyright of the opera "HMS Pinafore"
No, it was not true. Mark is saying that publishing a work automatically revokes all the privileges granted by copyright, which is ridiculous. There has never been a time where copyright only applies to secret works that aren't published. The HMS Pinafore issue -- and similarly for the works of Mark Twain, and any other British author who had work published in the US -- was that their copyright in Britain was not recognised, or legally enforceable, in the USA. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
