|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 20 2012 @ 12:44 AM EDT |
| I stand corrected. (I have heard this before). [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 20 2012 @ 08:36 AM EDT |
Binary object code copyright only extends as far as being an alternative
tangible expression of the source code.
Compile this source, get this binary.
This binary is a tangible expression of that source code.
This is necessary because if someone (for ex.) made a binary copy of the Windows
3.0 floppy disks (a direct copy of the tangible expression), and then stored
them on magnetic tape, it was arguable that if an innocent person then
subsequently produced a set of floppy disks from the tape records, they would
not have have copied the expression fixed in a tangible medium (the floppy
disks), and therefore not be a breach of copyright.
This is resolved by making the binary a tangible expression of the source code,
result in breach regardless of the medium in which the binary is stored.
This is what leads to the slightly barking idea that a new copy is made every
time you execute a program, because you copy from one tangible expression to
another (disk to RAM), that copying also creates a new machine.
Don't think about that last paragraph too hard, or the whole house of cards
might collapse.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
