Re: Fwd: Serious breach of copyright -- First post

看板FB_chat作者時間19年前 (2006/06/20 12:03), 編輯推噓0(000)
留言0則, 0人參與, 最新討論串11/15 (看更多)
Dag-Erling Sm鷨grav wrote: > Dennis Olvany <dennisolvany@gmail.com> writes: >> The concept of a fact obviously may not be copyrighted because it is >> merely a concept. Barring descriptive literary devices, the facts may be >> copied at will in their expressed form. A photo, being a descriptive >> device, is copyrightable. Considering the example of the Haynes manual, >> I can extract factual information --such as a starter change procedure-- >> from the manual word-for-word and use it. > No, you can't. Don't take my word for it; ask a lawyer. Johnathan Michaels hit on the next point I would like to make and that is the distinction between patent and copyright. A method or process may be patented, but the factual written procedure of such may not be copyrighted. I'll follow up with some examples of the types are things that are not copyrightable in a final attempt to convey my point. Roses are red. Violets are blue. 2+2=4 howto change oil 1. remove oil cap 2. drain oil 3. remove filter 4. etc. _______________________________________________ freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
文章代碼(AID): #14btEg00 (FB_chat)
討論串 (同標題文章)
文章代碼(AID): #14btEg00 (FB_chat)