Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932952AbXBQVVN (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Feb 2007 16:21:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932954AbXBQVVM (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Feb 2007 16:21:12 -0500 Received: from mail1.webmaster.com ([216.152.64.169]:1468 "EHLO mail1.webmaster.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932952AbXBQVVK (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Feb 2007 16:21:10 -0500 From: "David Schwartz" To: , "Alexandre Oliva" Cc: "Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" Subject: RE: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 13:21:12 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <7b69d1470702171129x36c4352cyc5b3a4b217729bf5@mail.gmail.com> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Sat, 17 Feb 2007 13:21:08 -0800 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Sat, 17 Feb 2007 13:21:10 -0800 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1916 Lines: 42 > On 2/17/07, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > Per this principle, it would seem that only source code and > > hand-crafted object code would be governed by copyright, since > > compilation is also an automated process. > Well, compilation is probably equivalent to "translation", which is > specifically included in the Act as forming a derivative work. I would hope that courts will hold that "translation" still means what it originally meant -- the creative process of converting a work from one language to another where one has to choose how to map the concepts behind a work to the most appropriate concept in a different language. Clearly translating Jabberwocky into German is creative in a way that compiling the Linux kernel from C to x86 binary is not. Interestingly, if you are right, then what online translation services like babelfish (that allow you to see a web site in another language) do is probably illegal as they create derivative works without permission of the copyright holder. It's easy to argue that putting up a web site grants people implicit permission to copy and render it so that they can see it, but much harder to argue that it gives them the right to create a derivative work. (Of course, you could argue fair use.) As far as I know, no court has addressed this issue. But I think the sensible thing is to hold that "translation", in copyright law, is meant as an example of one type of creative process that could create a derivative work, not that any process that can be argued to be translation (whether creative or not) automatically makes the result a work for copyright purposes. But you never know. DS - 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/