Hello Jeremy.
> That is an extreme version, and I think that we would all agree to your
> point on that specific case. However, in the cases of substantial
> changes, this creates a problem. What incentive is there, then, to
> make improvements to existing works?
Only the incentive that the owner of the code decides there should be. It's his
choice, not yours.
> If someone makes a major
> improvement to something, but loses control because it is a derivative
> work, it makes no sense to make that improvement. They loose the
> rights and rewards that go along with that work.
They had no rights to start with, so they are losing nothing.
> If that is the case, then that alone is sound reason NOT to submit
> modifications and patches.
If you break the law by changing a copyrighted work without permission then
telling everyone that you did it would be the second stupid thing you did. :)
> In other words, my patch files and
> source, while complimentary to the work, should be treated as completely
> separate works in terms of ownership and control.
Something which is "complimentary" is not "complete separate" by definition.
Patching a program is somewhat like changing a few notes in a song. That it
results in a better product is irrelevant.
Please note: I'm not saying that the copyright system is perfect but it is what
it is. The author calls all the shots. In many cases authors choose to waive
many of their rights. There is an endless stream of possibilities.
This is why you should read the copyright notice before you make use of a
product. You have no right to stand on the author's shoulders unless he allows
you to. If he doesn't then your choices are: Find a more accodomating author,
create it yourself, or do without.
You seem to feel that the ends (patches making a better program) justify the
means. But have you considered that the author might have not written the
program to start with if he knew that he wasn't going to be able to control it?
Where would you be then with no program to start with?
There are arguments to be made (as have been here) for both viewpoints.
Copyright law allows for both - but at the discretion of the author, not the
user.
Regards,
John
John Souvestre - Integrated Data Systems - (504) 355-0609
___________________
Nolug mailing list
nolug@nolug.org
Received on 12/13/08
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 12/19/08 EST