[help-3dldf] Re: Testing for ellipsoidality

[Hans Aberg]

On 2004/11/24 22:35, Laurence Finston at address@hidden wrote:

> I certainly _don't_ want to try to persuade you to do anything you don't want
> to do.  That would be very ungrateful of me.  I can use your explanations in
> the way you suggest, i.e., to learn the material and put it in my own words.
> I'll have to ask Ted Teah about anything else.  I do know that extensive
> quotes would make the manual unfree.  According to my understanding of it,
> your work is automatically protected by copyright law, whether you choose
> assert your rights or not.  In Germany, there is no formal registration
> process, as there is in the US.  I don't know what the law is in Sweden.
> 
>> Also, the copyright is essentially a
>> commercial law protecting commercial interests.
> 
> From a legal point of view, copyright law is what makes the GPL and other free
> licenses, and thus Free Software, possible.  In other words, the GPL is only
> valid because of copyright law.  Recently, the validity of the GPL was
> confirmed by a German court.  The magazine _c't_ reported that this was the
> first time a judge anywhere in the world had upheld its validity.  In other
> places, it hasn't really been tested.  This is the sword of Damocles hanging
> over the heads of all developers of Free Software.
> 
>> If you do not violate my
>> potential commercial interests, or if you do not suspect I will sue you, you
>> can of course use the materail.
> 
> I'm sorry to say that this isn't true, and I'm not allowed to use any material
> from any source in this way.

Freedom of speech laws have precedence over commercial laws. There was a
case in the US, where an artist used Baribies dolls in an exhibition, which
the company making these dolls wanted to block. But the court deicded that
the exhibition was not commrecial an dtherfore the freedom of speech took
precedence.

> In addition, I'm no longer the copyright holder of GNU 3DLDF, the FSF is,
> so it's the FSF that would be liable for damages to you and/or your employer,
> and I would be liable for damages to the FSF according to the agreement I
> signed with them.
> 
>> It might be controversial if you copyright
>> my comments. I do not know what happens there in journalism. It would be
>> strange indeed if an interview victim cannot furtherer her comments
>> elsewhere because a journalist has copyrighted them.
>> 
>> 
> 
> I don't think this would be possible, either.

So I think what matters is if a person has violated the potential commercial
rights.

As for the things I write to you, my concerns are mainly mathematical, that
what ends up in formal public is logically correct, and really nothing else.
So if you get such informal comments from me, or any mathematician, which
are not directly intended for publication, and want to publish it, you are
expected to make sure the stuff ending up in the publication is logically.
correct.