Copying Copyrighted Code?
BlitzMax Forums/BlitzMax Programming/Copying Copyrighted Code?
| ||
| If somebody writes a piece of code and as part of it there's a notice that says the code is copyrighted and can be used freely but only for non-commercial purposes, and is not GPL or LGPL protected, and is written in a language such as C or Java, and I look at this code and `use it as inspiration` and write a `similar` program in BlitzMax, which could almost be a straight conversion of the program from the original language to BlitzMax language, does this free me from having to comply with the original authors copyright and licencing notice because I've written it in a different language, or by writing it in BlitzMax myself does that entitle me to say that I now have copyright of the BlitzMax conversion? I know that if I have to ask this, it is maybe slightly dodgy already, but sometimes there is a fine line with this legal stuff. I guess another example would be to ask, is it okay to create a BlitzMax program that does the same thing as some other program I saw on the internet, provided that code is not patented? |
| ||
| Yes it is. And you can't copyright ideas, although many lawyers think otherwise :) I can do a tetris clone, as long as there is nothing in the name that reminds of tetris. (And these guys will threaten you regardless). So MyTris and FunTris is not ok, but BlockMaster and BrickWizard would be ok. |
| ||
| So I can take say somebody's Java library, which they designed and put together, and rewrite it in BlitzMax and then say this BlitzMax library is copyrighted by me as the author, even if most of the code is almost the same as the Java code? I mean, I don't like the idea of stealing something from somebody, but if there is work involved in making it work in a different language then obviously there is some authorship on my part. |
| ||
| Yes. You are not allowed to copy the code but you can recreate the algorithm. But you have to make sure that the algorithm is not patented. (The LZW-compression algorithm used in GIF is a good example of an algorithm which you are not allowed to recreate without permission.) -- Byteemoz @ozak: Ideas / Algorithms can't be copyrighted but they can be patented under certain conditions (at least in the US) ... |
| ||
| Good thing I'm in the EU then :) Well. Come to think of it, that's rather sad too. Oh well... |
| ||
| ozak: There are even algorithms that are patented over here (mp3 for example as the frauenhofer institute is in EU) |
| ||
| Yep. That's right. <no software patents plug>Death to software patents!</no software patents plug> |
| ||
| So I can take say somebody's Java library, which they designed and put together, and rewrite it in BlitzMax and then say this BlitzMax library is copyrighted by me as the author, even if most of the code is almost the same as the Java code? It's hard to say with any degree of certainty, because copyright laws are archaic. However the author does traditionally have the right to translate his own work - if that is interpreted litterally by a court, you could be in trouble.Other wise, I believe that it would qualify as a derived work and thus be subject to fair use. However since the author has explicitly declared it is not to be used in a commercial product, I would see if I could find similar source code in the public domain - just in case. |
| ||
| I'd say that's good advise FlameDuck. Copyrights and Patents have way too many gray areas. Especially for us people that have no law background. Porting something from someone else's code could be a trick. You may also want to get with the author and ask to see what you are doing is ok by them. Don't beat around the bush with it if you plan on selling your product. At least make the attempt to contact them; if you cannot, then seek alternatives. |
| ||
| Yah, still searching. Thanks. |
| ||
| Angel when you looked at the code, didnt it just make you realise that the way you were already planning to do it, was the right way? |
| ||
| I always find it strange that people's first instinct isn't to contact the author for permission, even if it isn't legally required. |
| ||
| You might have found it strange the first time. But surly you expect it now? |
| ||
| So far I hadn't found any code that didn't have a licence attached such as GPL or LGPL etc, so there wasn't any point to me of contacting the author because using the code would bring some difficulties. I have found some code, though, that expressedly states it is free of any licence and can do with it what I will for any purpose in any software. So that's cool. |
| ||
| @skidracer: I've been burned a time or two by "not asking permission" when doing something like this. Here in the US, stuff stinks up because the "author" always has the copyrights automatically. If they decide to release it under whatever terms, then thats that. It can be a huge gray area. Something that always sux for ppl in the US to deal with. This was no intention to be a flame back towards your remark... more informational for why I stated what I did earlier. Honestly, H&K has a valid point. Now that you are part of the BRL team (correct me if I'm wrong), you really don't want ppl stealing the source of Blitz* and republishing it under a new title without passing it by you all first right? (I understand that its a bit of a different context, but the same principle) I just like to play the "fair is fair" tactic. If I took some of your code that you so generously distribute and use it in my works (idea or code itself), I would place a tribute to you in my program. Usually thats all most developers would even like to have if anything at all. @AngelDaniel: Glad you found something you like. :) |
| ||
| I Have copyright notices on my software and I didnt put it there for no reason, get it, its like that. A while ago I wrote (he says again... and again... and again....) emulator2001 ,the only emulator of its type. I was approached by an individual who told me that they would like the source to make an "amiga port". Surprise / Surprise he releases "my program" under his own label in Win32 stating he is the creator and his emulator is more advanced than mine when infact its not as good as mine. It leaves me feeling like "What the F*ck" I wrote that sh*t and why do that, its a total no brainer to port code instead of writing it yourself. I have learned a valuable lesson. Mate look for the wording where it says "open source" - or leave it alone. |
| ||
| I have learned a valuable lesson. What exactly? It seems more to me that he learnt the lesson. Rip off people who aren't likely to press charges. |
| ||
| I learnt say "bullshit" next time i smell bullshit |
| ||
| I agree with Flame here. Copyright notices are totaly pointless If the person ripped off just walks away from it. |
| ||
| H&K A couple of websites put up links to "his emulator" so I contacted them and explained the situation, They immediately replace them with links to my site. I found that it effectively prevented "his emulator" from becoming known to anysite therefore it might as well not exist. I cannot pull the file from his ISP server without nuking the whole building. |
| ||
| Well done you Gav |
| ||
| But you can write his ISP a mail and notify them that you will take legal steps if they don't take down the stolen work from the server. Most ISPs will react quite fast on such stuff, especially if you can easily proof that yours was there before. |
   |