• Irritated. Does the lawyers take over?

    From none) (albert@21:1/5 to All on Sat Sep 23 14:08:21 2023
    XPost: comp.lang.lisp

    I study the source of clojure:

    / ------------------------------------------
    /**
    * Copyright (c) Rich Hickey. All rights reserved.
    The use and distribution terms for this software are covered by the
    * Eclipse Public License 1.0 (http://opensource.org/licenses/eclipse-1.0.php)
    * which can be found in the file epl-v10.html at the root of this distribution.
    * By using this software in any fashion, you are agreeing to be bound by
    * the terms of this license.
    * You must not remove this notice, or any other, from this software.
    **/

    /* rich Jun 11, 2008 */

    package clojure.lang;

    public interface IReduce extends IReduceInit{
    Object reduce(IFn f) ;
    }
    / ------------------------------------------

    Really? Can we be forced to look at copyright before we can use
    this? Can this trivial code really be copyrighted?
    Note that the copyright message dwarfs the code.
    The only clue what this is supposed to mean is that it is present at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/clojure/clojure/master/src/jvm/clojure/lang/IReduce.java

    Groetjes Albert
    --
    Don't praise the day before the evening. One swallow doesn't make spring.
    You must not say "hey" before you have crossed the bridge. Don't sell the
    hide of the bear until you shot it. Better one bird in the hand than ten in
    the air. First gain is a cat spinning. - the Wise from Antrim -

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Zbig@21:1/5 to All on Sat Sep 23 08:28:10 2023
    I study the source of clojure:

    / ------------------------------------------
    /**
    * Copyright (c) Rich Hickey. All rights reserved.
    The use and distribution terms for this software are covered by the
    * Eclipse Public License 1.0 (http://opensource.org/licenses/eclipse-1.0.php) * which can be found in the file epl-v10.html at the root of this distribution.
    * By using this software in any fashion, you are agreeing to be bound by
    * the terms of this license.
    * You must not remove this notice, or any other, from this software.
    **/

    /* rich Jun 11, 2008 */

    package clojure.lang;

    public interface IReduce extends IReduceInit{
    Object reduce(IFn f) ;
    }
    / ------------------------------------------

    Really? Can we be forced to look at copyright before we can use
    this? Can this trivial code really be copyrighted?
    Note that the copyright message dwarfs the code.
    The only clue what this is supposed to mean is that it is present at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/clojure/clojure/master/src/jvm/clojure/lang/IReduce.java

    No wonder Mr. Hickey became Rich already in 2008. He
    takes care of his own affairs. :]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Kaz Kylheku@21:1/5 to albert@cherry on Sat Sep 23 18:28:52 2023
    XPost: comp.lang.lisp

    On 2023-09-23, albert@cherry.(none) (albert) <albert@cherry> wrote:
    I study the source of clojure:

    / ------------------------------------------
    /**
    * Copyright (c) Rich Hickey. All rights reserved.
    The use and distribution terms for this software are covered by the
    * Eclipse Public License 1.0 (http://opensource.org/licenses/eclipse-1.0.php)
    * which can be found in the file epl-v10.html at the root of this distribution.
    * By using this software in any fashion, you are agreeing to be bound by
    * the terms of this license.
    * You must not remove this notice, or any other, from this software.
    **/

    /* rich Jun 11, 2008 */

    package clojure.lang;

    public interface IReduce extends IReduceInit{
    Object reduce(IFn f) ;
    }
    / ------------------------------------------

    Really? Can we be forced to look at copyright before we can use
    this? Can this trivial code really be copyrighted?

    It's very common for software projects to have unform copyright headers plastered into every file.

    This applies to proprietary, commercial software as well as free open
    source.

    I've never worked in a company in which every source file we developed
    didn't have a copyright block on the top, no matter how trivial the
    content.

    Pretty trivial works are copyrightable, like simple-minded pop songs.

    Note that the copyright message dwarfs the code.

    The code looks like it is only an interface specification; i.e.
    it defines an API and not any program behavior.

    Copyrighting API's is a form of monopolistic abuse.

    It was the subject of a lawsuit between Oracle and Google.

    Read all about it here.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/API#Dispute_over_copyright_protection_for_APIs

    (And in fact that involved Java, not that it matters.)

    The latest scoop is that Oracle kept appealing this all the way to
    the U.S. Supreme Court and lost; the court decided that Google's cloning
    of APIs isn't infringing.

    Whether or not APIs are copyrightable, projects are going to stick their copyright header on files that define APIs, and simply copy-pasting
    their exact definition (especially including the copyright header, doh!)
    could be infringing.

    --
    TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
    Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
    Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
    NOTE: If you use Google Groups, I don't see you, unless you're whitelisted.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Brad Eckert@21:1/5 to Kaz Kylheku on Sat Sep 23 16:54:18 2023
    On Saturday, September 23, 2023 at 11:28:56 AM UTC-7, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
    On 2023-09-23, albert@cherry.(none) (albert) <albert@cherry> wrote:
    I study the source of clojure:

    / ------------------------------------------
    /**
    * Copyright (c) Rich Hickey. All rights reserved.
    The use and distribution terms for this software are covered by the
    * Eclipse Public License 1.0 (http://opensource.org/licenses/eclipse-1.0.php)
    * which can be found in the file epl-v10.html at the root of this distribution.
    * By using this software in any fashion, you are agreeing to be bound by
    * the terms of this license.
    * You must not remove this notice, or any other, from this software.
    **/

    /* rich Jun 11, 2008 */

    package clojure.lang;

    public interface IReduce extends IReduceInit{
    Object reduce(IFn f) ;
    }
    / ------------------------------------------

    Really? Can we be forced to look at copyright before we can use
    this? Can this trivial code really be copyrighted?
    It's very common for software projects to have unform copyright headers plastered into every file.

    This applies to proprietary, commercial software as well as free open source.

    I've never worked in a company in which every source file we developed didn't have a copyright block on the top, no matter how trivial the
    content.

    Pretty trivial works are copyrightable, like simple-minded pop songs.
    Note that the copyright message dwarfs the code.
    The code looks like it is only an interface specification; i.e.
    it defines an API and not any program behavior.

    Copyrighting API's is a form of monopolistic abuse.

    It was the subject of a lawsuit between Oracle and Google.

    Read all about it here.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/API#Dispute_over_copyright_protection_for_APIs

    (And in fact that involved Java, not that it matters.)

    The latest scoop is that Oracle kept appealing this all the way to
    the U.S. Supreme Court and lost; the court decided that Google's cloning
    of APIs isn't infringing.

    Whether or not APIs are copyrightable, projects are going to stick their copyright header on files that define APIs, and simply copy-pasting
    their exact definition (especially including the copyright header, doh!) could be infringing.

    --
    TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
    Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal Mastodon: @Kazi...@mstdn.ca
    NOTE: If you use Google Groups, I don't see you, unless you're whitelisted.

    "The first thing we do is kill all the lawyers."
    From Shakespeare's Henry VI

    I have a better idea. Force all the lawyers to develop large C++ applications.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From dxf@21:1/5 to Brad Eckert on Sun Sep 24 13:17:46 2023
    On 24/09/2023 9:54 am, Brad Eckert wrote:
    On Saturday, September 23, 2023 at 11:28:56 AM UTC-7, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
    On 2023-09-23, albert@cherry.(none) (albert) <albert@cherry> wrote:
    I study the source of clojure:

    / ------------------------------------------
    /**
    * Copyright (c) Rich Hickey. All rights reserved.
    The use and distribution terms for this software are covered by the
    * Eclipse Public License 1.0 (http://opensource.org/licenses/eclipse-1.0.php)
    * which can be found in the file epl-v10.html at the root of this distribution.
    * By using this software in any fashion, you are agreeing to be bound by >>> * the terms of this license.
    * You must not remove this notice, or any other, from this software.
    **/

    /* rich Jun 11, 2008 */

    package clojure.lang;

    public interface IReduce extends IReduceInit{
    Object reduce(IFn f) ;
    }
    / ------------------------------------------

    Really? Can we be forced to look at copyright before we can use
    this? Can this trivial code really be copyrighted?
    It's very common for software projects to have unform copyright headers
    plastered into every file.

    This applies to proprietary, commercial software as well as free open
    source.

    I've never worked in a company in which every source file we developed
    didn't have a copyright block on the top, no matter how trivial the
    content.

    Pretty trivial works are copyrightable, like simple-minded pop songs.
    Note that the copyright message dwarfs the code.
    The code looks like it is only an interface specification; i.e.
    it defines an API and not any program behavior.

    Copyrighting API's is a form of monopolistic abuse.

    It was the subject of a lawsuit between Oracle and Google.

    Read all about it here.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/API#Dispute_over_copyright_protection_for_APIs >>
    (And in fact that involved Java, not that it matters.)

    The latest scoop is that Oracle kept appealing this all the way to
    the U.S. Supreme Court and lost; the court decided that Google's cloning
    of APIs isn't infringing.

    Whether or not APIs are copyrightable, projects are going to stick their
    copyright header on files that define APIs, and simply copy-pasting
    their exact definition (especially including the copyright header, doh!)
    could be infringing.

    --
    TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
    Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
    Mastodon: @Kazi...@mstdn.ca
    NOTE: If you use Google Groups, I don't see you, unless you're whitelisted.

    "The first thing we do is kill all the lawyers."
    From Shakespeare's Henry VI

    I have a better idea. Force all the lawyers to develop large C++ applications.

    "Welcome to My [Copyright] Nightmare" - Alice Cooper

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lorem Ipsum@21:1/5 to none albert on Sat Sep 23 22:50:04 2023
    On Saturday, September 23, 2023 at 8:08:25 AM UTC-4, none albert wrote:
    I study the source of clojure:

    / ------------------------------------------
    /**
    * Copyright (c) Rich Hickey. All rights reserved.
    The use and distribution terms for this software are covered by the
    * Eclipse Public License 1.0 (http://opensource.org/licenses/eclipse-1.0.php)
    * which can be found in the file epl-v10.html at the root of this distribution.
    * By using this software in any fashion, you are agreeing to be bound by
    * the terms of this license.
    * You must not remove this notice, or any other, from this software.
    **/

    /* rich Jun 11, 2008 */

    package clojure.lang;

    public interface IReduce extends IReduceInit{
    Object reduce(IFn f) ;
    }
    / ------------------------------------------

    Really? Can we be forced to look at copyright before we can use
    this? Can this trivial code really be copyrighted?
    Note that the copyright message dwarfs the code.
    The only clue what this is supposed to mean is that it is present at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/clojure/clojure/master/src/jvm/clojure/lang/IReduce.java

    Groetjes Albert
    --
    Don't praise the day before the evening. One swallow doesn't make spring. You must not say "hey" before you have crossed the bridge. Don't sell the hide of the bear until you shot it. Better one bird in the hand than ten in the air. First gain is a cat spinning. - the Wise from Antrim -

    Your tag lines are often bigger than your posts. So fair dinkum.

    --

    Rick C.

    - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)