Re: Copyright Digression (Was: Re: [tlug] linux in Japanese schools)

[Jean-Christophe Helary <fusion@example.com>]

On 9 janv. 07, at 00:41, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

> Now, you can define "work" any way you like, but the description
> you've posted pretty clearly has little to do with the definition used
> by U.S. copyright law (which as far as I know is fundamentally the
> same in all jurisdictions participating in the relevant international
> conventions).

Copyright implies that there is a second person besides the author  
who has or has not the right to copy the work.
That means that the work must exist for people _other_ than the  
author. So I think what I wrote has not "very little to do" with any  
copyright law. If the work only exists for the author then copyright  
law is not even relevant since nobody is ever going to infringe that  
law.

Jean-Christophe

> Footnotes:
> [1]  Cf. http://www.linuxmafix.com/~rick/faq/#djb, IIRC.

The server does not seem to answer.