Copyright of derivative work released under a CC licence
email at greglondon.com
Thu Dec 2 17:47:19 EST 2004
Rob Myers said:
> On 2 Dec 2004, at 22:16, Greg London wrote:
>> If someone developed a functionally equivalent,
>> but completely independent, version of a piece of code,
>> I believe it is considered a separate work, regardless
>> of whether the second author once used the word "derivative"
>> to describe the work. There is "derivative" as in a strict
>> legal meaning, and then there is "derivative" as in someone
>> off the street thinking of derivative.
> I think it depends on whether you saw the original code or not. If you
> didn't, it's a "clean-room" reverse-engineered functional equivalent.
Agreed. You'll note I attempt to withold actual judgement here because I
simply don't know all the details. I say "IF xxx is true, THEN it is
a derivative". And leave it up to whomever to decide if xxx actually
In the end, anybody can still sue anybody else and/or be a royal PITA.
More information about the cc-licenses