Message-Id: <4290E466.5040907@khandalf.com>
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 21:58:30 +0200
From: "Brian O'Mahoney" <omb@khandalf.com>
Reply-To: omb@bluewin.ch
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050317)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: When we detect that a 16550 was in fact part of a NatSemi
    SuperIO chip
References: <200505220008.j4M08uE9025378@hera.kernel.org>
    <1116763033.19183.14.camel@localhost.localdomain>
    <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505220953300.2307@ppc970.osdl.org>
    <1116785646.6285.24.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
In-Reply-To: <1116785646.6285.24.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Replyto: omb@bluewin.ch
Read-Receipt-To: omb@bluewin.ch
X-DCC-spamcheck-02.tornado.cablecom.ch-Metrics: smtp-03.tornado.cablecom.ch 32701; Body=3
	Fuz1=3 Fuz2=3
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 4086
Lines: 93

There is NO Question(TM), the DPA is about the privacy, appropriateness,
accuracy of private data and the way that data can be used by government
or industry, and I can see no reason why anyone should remove
'sign-offs' or other identification in the original e-mail which forms
part of the original communication, if legal advice was received to
the contrary it is _plain_wrong_; (for example we could not store e-mail
sent to us, which is often mandatory to the proper conduct of business).

Copyright law is complicated, since it differs in the UK, EU and non EU
contries, such as Switzerland; so in the UK copyright automatically
persists in anything I write, in the US it dosn't, BUT, if a Bern
Convention copyright notice is included, eg:

(c) 2005, Brian O'Mahoney, all rights reserved, this notice and any
'Signed-off-by:' notice included herein must remain unmodified.

then this is binding in all signatorey countries to the Bern Copyright
convention including the EC, UK and US, and courts including the
UK High Court, the European Court in Luxembourg and several US Federal
Circuits have upheld such terms and have issued injunctions and damages
for breach _and_ such notice would serve as a definitive defense to any
DPA complaint, from the DPA regulator (permission is given), or the
copyright holder (compromise).

So Copyright will always rule over DPA and violation of Copyright
======================================
is a tort.

Next the, so called 'Moral Right (droit morale)' in the UK is simply
the new European name for the automatic assumption of Copyright, and
is irrelevant, via a vis Economic Right, in the presence of an explicit
Bern Convention notice.

Finally a short note on the Bern and UCC conventions is set
out below:

The Universal Copyright Convention (UCC), which had as a main purpose
the inclusion of the United States in a general system of international
copyright, was signed at Geneva in 1952. It was accepted by the United
States in 1954 and came into effect the following year. The U.S.
copyright law was modified to conform to the convention, notably by
elimination of procedural steps for the establishment of U.S. copyright
in works published in other signatory countries and of the requirement
that works in the English language by foreign authors be manufactured in
the United States to obtain U.S. copyright protection. The United
Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
played a leading part in the negotiations for the UCC, which was revised
in 1971. In 1989 the United States became a member of the Berne
Convention, which was most recently revised in 1971.


Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 09:59 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
>>On Sun, 22 May 2005, David Woodhouse wrote:
>>
>>>Linus, please do not apply patches from me which have my personal
>>>information mangled or removed.
>>
>>I've asked Russell not to do it, but the fact is, he's worried about legal 
>>issues, and while I've also tried to resolve those (by having the OSDL 
>>lawyer try to contact some lawyers in the UK), that hasn't been clarified 
>>yet.
> 
> 
> there is a potential nasty interaction with the UK moral rights thing
> where an author can demand that his authorship claim remains intact...
> so if David objects to his authorship being mangled (and partially
> removed) he may have a strong legal position to do so.
> 
> Arjan ... who is wondering if the UK DPA law is in conflict with UK
> copyright law and is glad to not be in the UK anymore
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 
> 

-- 
mit freundlichen Gr??en, Brian.

Brian
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/