On Sat, 1 Apr 2023 at 10:34, Jim Schwartz <jsch...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > Yea. You’re right. I probably need a lawyer someday. Thanks. >
If your needs are basic, you shouldn't need a lawyer. Copyright law and treaties DO protect you. But it's important to be aware that no amount of legal protection - whether you hire a lawyer or not, and whether you identify copyright and license or not - will stop people from copying your code. NOTHING will stop people from copying your code if they have access to it. All you can do is discourage them. So that brings us back to the original question: Why protect your *source code* specifically? There are two extremes available to everyone: 1) Distribute the source code. Let everyone see it. Stick a license on it that permits them to use it, modify it, distribute modified versions. Set your code free and let it be used. 2) Don't distribute the program *at all*. Don't distribute the source OR the binary. Instead, permit people to *access* the program - which, in today's world, usually means a web service. Both of these are very popular and work well. I don't have access to the Gmail source code but I'm using the service. I don't have access to the Twitch.tv source code but I'm using the service. Meanwhile, I have Python programs running on a Debian system using the Linux kernel, invoked using bash, served from an ext4 mass storage device, etc, etc. I have the binary code for all of these, and I'm legally guaranteed access to the source if I want it, so there's no incentive to steal it. The middle ground of "distribute binaries but stop people from accessing the source" is a much narrower use-case, and I would say that it's not actually a single use-case but a family of them, each with different needs and requirements. So it's essential to know what you're actually trying to protect, and why. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
