RE: Standing on multi-authored works
cody koeninger <[email protected]> Wed, 20 Apr 2005 10:42:14 -0700 (PDT)
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.misc.free-software-business |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
--- Lawrence Rosen <[email protected]> wrote: > If that's the holding, then it seems to me the case > applies to a situation > where the contributor wants to rely on the > collective work copyright > registration rather than get his own. The author of > the collective work can > protect his collective work regardless of whether > the underlying > contributions are registered. I believe you are correct. Thank you for catching me on that. I read from the case: "we hold that unless the copyright owner of a collective work also owns all the rights in a constituent part, a collective work registration will not extend to a constituent part", and didn't adequately think it through before posting. I apologize to Mr. Behlendorf for the erroneous response. So why does the FSF require assignments? Are they concerned about the situation where the only evidence of infringement concerns a contribution, rather than the whole? Or are they concerned about a court treating the software as a joint work rather than a collective work? In the joint work context, I believe there is at least some risk of the other authors being indispensable parties, although I hesitate to mention specific cases. > After all, consider > the edge case where a > collective work contains only public domain > contributions.... Again, youre absolutely right. That makes me wonder about an edge case in which a compilation consists of contributions which are not independent works. E.g. a story made of a series of single words, each chosen by a separate contributor. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com