incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <>
Subject RE: Licensing Issue
Date Sat, 27 Jun 2015 04:53:53 GMT
There's a difference between making a claim, affixing a notice, etc., and it being lawful and
the right to having done so being legally defensible.

I suspect this normally doesn't matter and is a trifle unless a conflict of some sort drags
the usurper into court.  Finding plagiarism, even in a derivative, will be quite unfortunate.

 - Dennis

<orcnote /> below.

-----Original Message-----
From: Ted Dunning [] 
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2015 18:18
To:; Dennis Hamilton
Subject: Re: Licensing Issue

On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 6:58 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <
> wrote:
[ ... ]
> But either way, one cannot assert any kind of property right over a work
> that is not yours (or of someone providing work for hire to you), whether
> public domain or not.

Perhaps true in a literal sense.  Nearly trivial (nearly!) derivative works
can be claimed with no attribution, I think if a license like the CC0 has
been applied. The issue of moral rights, especially in Europe, seems sticky.

  If the creation of the derivative work is allowed, the claim by the creator of the derivative
extends only to the aspects that are original with that creator.  I think it is basically
the case that one does not gain copyright over work that is not one's own (or obtained by
hiring someone) by any means unless there has been a [recorded] copyright transfer (a license
not being enough).

[This might be a (probably-minor) component in how the Oracle v. Google appeal is resolved
by SCOTUS.)]

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message